Micronesia (country) vs Panama: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met
Micronesia (country)
87.99
in 2014
Panama
88.25
in 2014
Micronesia (country) rank
56th
Panama rank
54th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time
- Micronesia (country)
- Panama
How they compare
Panama currently reports 88.25 against 87.99 in Micronesia (country), a difference of 0.26.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Panama has been ahead every year.
Micronesia (country) ranks 56th and Panama ranks 54th of 181 countries.
Panama has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Micronesia (country) | Panama | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 81.09 | 89.44 | 8.35 | Panama |
| 2010s | 86.75 | 89.78 | 3.03 | Panama |
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, Micronesia (country) or Panama?
- Panama, at 88.25 against 87.99 in Micronesia (country) as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Micronesia (country) and Panama?
- 0.26, with Panama ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Micronesia (country) and Panama?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Micronesia (country) and Panama rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
- Micronesia (country) ranks 56th and Panama ranks 54th 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.