Chad vs Kazakhstan: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met

Chad
0
in 2014
Kazakhstan
13.05
in 2014
Chad rank
174th
Kazakhstan rank
172nd

Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time

  • Chad
  • Kazakhstan
0102030200520092014

How they compare

Kazakhstan currently reports 13.05 against 0 in Chad, a difference of 13.05.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Kazakhstan has been ahead every year.

Chad ranks 174th and Kazakhstan ranks 172nd of 181 countries.

Kazakhstan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Chad Kazakhstan Difference Ahead
2000s 0 3.55 3.55 Kazakhstan
2010s 0 18.83 18.83 Kazakhstan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met, Chad or Kazakhstan?
Kazakhstan, at 13.05 against 0 in Chad as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Chad and Kazakhstan?
13.05, with Kazakhstan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Chad and Kazakhstan?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Chad and Kazakhstan rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Chad ranks 174th and Kazakhstan ranks 172nd of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,813 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

The score for the cost to import benchmarks economies with respect to the regulatory best practice on the indicator. The score ranges from 0 to 100, where 0 represents the worst regulatory performance and 100 the best regulatory performance, and is computed based on the methodology in the DB06-15 studies.