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

Jordan
84.61
in 2014
Kuwait
84.35
in 2014
Jordan rank
73rd
Kuwait rank
76th

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

  • Jordan
  • Kuwait
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Jordan currently reports 84.61 against 84.35 in Kuwait, a difference of 0.26.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Jordan ahead.

Jordan ranks 73rd and Kuwait ranks 76th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Jordan averaged higher in 1 and Kuwait in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Jordan Kuwait Difference Ahead
2000s 73.91 76.45 2.54 Kuwait
2010s 80.69 80.52 0.1729 Jordan

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, Jordan or Kuwait?
Jordan, at 84.61 against 84.35 in Kuwait as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Jordan and Kuwait?
0.26, with Jordan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Jordan and Kuwait?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Jordan and Kuwait rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
Jordan ranks 73rd and Kuwait ranks 76th 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.