Democratic Republic of Congo vs Iraq: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time
- Democratic Republic of Congo
- Iraq
How they compare
Iraq currently reports 41.73 against 30.36 in Democratic Republic of Congo, a difference of 11.37.
That makes Iraq's figure about 1.4 times Democratic Republic of Congo's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Iraq ahead.
Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 166th and Iraq ranks 163rd of 181 countries.
Iraq has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Democratic Republic of Congo | Iraq | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0 | 5.03 | 5.03 | Iraq |
| 2010s | 26.6 | 31.85 | 5.25 | Iraq |
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, Democratic Republic of Congo or Iraq?
- Iraq, at 41.73 against 30.36 in Democratic Republic of Congo as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Democratic Republic of Congo and Iraq?
- 11.37, with Iraq ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Democratic Republic of Congo and Iraq?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Democratic Republic of Congo and Iraq rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
- Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 166th and Iraq ranks 163rd 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
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.