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

Iran
78.93
in 2014
Madagascar
78.93
in 2014
Iran rank
108th
Madagascar rank
108th

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

  • Iran
  • Madagascar
20406080200520092014

How they compare

Iran currently reports 78.93 against 78.93 in Madagascar, a difference of 0.

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

Iran ranks 108th and Madagascar ranks 108th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Iran Madagascar Difference Ahead
2000s 36.61 61 24.4 Madagascar
2010s 61.37 74.38 13.02 Madagascar

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, Iran or Madagascar?
Iran, at 78.93 against 78.93 in Madagascar as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Iran and Madagascar?
0, with Iran ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iran and Madagascar?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Iran and Madagascar rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Iran ranks 108th and Madagascar ranks 108th 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.