Latvia vs Lithuania: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met
Latvia
92.32
in 2014
Lithuania
92.34
in 2014
Latvia rank
34th
Lithuania rank
33rd
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time
- Latvia
- Lithuania
How they compare
Lithuania currently reports 92.34 against 92.32 in Latvia, a difference of 0.02.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Lithuania ahead.
Latvia ranks 34th and Lithuania ranks 33rd of 181 countries.
Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Lithuania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 84.86 | 84.19 | 0.6705 | Latvia |
| 2010s | 91.54 | 89.43 | 2.11 | Latvia |
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, Latvia or Lithuania?
- Lithuania, at 92.34 against 92.32 in Latvia as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Latvia and Lithuania?
- 0.02, with Lithuania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Lithuania?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Latvia and Lithuania rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
- Latvia ranks 34th and Lithuania ranks 33rd 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
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.