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

Ecuador
79.55
in 2014
Romania
80
in 2014
Ecuador rank
105th
Romania rank
102nd

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

  • Ecuador
  • Romania
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Romania currently reports 80 against 79.55 in Ecuador, a difference of 0.45.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 105th and Romania ranks 102nd of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 1 and Romania in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador Romania Difference Ahead
2000s 74.45 73.78 0.6755 Ecuador
2010s 78.1 78.91 0.8172 Romania

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, Ecuador or Romania?
Romania, at 80 against 79.55 in Ecuador as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Ecuador and Romania?
0.45, with Romania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Romania?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ecuador and Romania rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Ecuador ranks 105th and Romania ranks 102nd 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.