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

Guyana
93.76
in 2014
Mauritius
93.93
in 2014
Guyana rank
19th
Mauritius rank
18th

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

  • Guyana
  • Mauritius
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Mauritius currently reports 93.93 against 93.76 in Guyana, a difference of 0.17.

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

Guyana ranks 19th and Mauritius ranks 18th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Guyana Mauritius Difference Ahead
2000s 85.65 90.69 5.04 Mauritius
2010s 92.33 93.32 0.9851 Mauritius

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, Guyana or Mauritius?
Mauritius, at 93.93 against 93.76 in Guyana as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Guyana and Mauritius?
0.17, with Mauritius ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guyana and Mauritius?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Guyana and Mauritius rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Guyana ranks 19th and Mauritius ranks 18th 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.