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

Greece
86.39
in 2014
Italy
86.21
in 2014
Greece rank
62nd
Italy rank
64th

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

  • Greece
  • Italy
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Greece currently reports 86.39 against 86.21 in Italy, a difference of 0.18.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Italy ahead.

Greece ranks 62nd and Italy ranks 64th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Greece averaged higher in 1 and Italy in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Greece Italy Difference Ahead
2000s 82.13 82.24 0.1092 Italy
2010s 85.7 84.91 0.7851 Greece

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, Greece or Italy?
Greece, at 86.39 against 86.21 in Italy as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Greece and Italy?
0.18, with Greece ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Greece and Italy?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Greece and Italy rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Greece ranks 62nd and Italy ranks 64th 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.