Côte d'Ivoire vs Nigeria: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Côte d'Ivoire
71.74
in 2014
Nigeria
71.75
in 2014
Côte d'Ivoire rank
135th
Nigeria rank
134th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Côte d'Ivoire
- Nigeria
How they compare
Nigeria currently reports 71.75 against 71.74 in Côte d'Ivoire, a difference of 0.01.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Côte d'Ivoire ahead.
Côte d'Ivoire ranks 135th and Nigeria ranks 134th of 184 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Côte d'Ivoire averaged higher in 1 and Nigeria in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Côte d'Ivoire | Nigeria | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 55.74 | 42.44 | 13.29 | Côte d'Ivoire |
| 2010s | 61.74 | 68.74 | 6.99 | Nigeria |
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), Côte d'Ivoire or Nigeria?
- Nigeria, at 71.75 against 71.74 in Côte d'Ivoire as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Côte d'Ivoire and Nigeria?
- 0.01, with Nigeria ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Côte d'Ivoire and Nigeria?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Côte d'Ivoire and Nigeria rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Côte d'Ivoire ranks 135th and Nigeria ranks 134th of 184 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.