Mozambique vs Sierra Leone: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Mozambique
78.13
in 2014
Sierra Leone
78.57
in 2014
Mozambique rank
116th
Sierra Leone rank
113th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Mozambique
- Sierra Leone
How they compare
Sierra Leone currently reports 78.57 against 78.13 in Mozambique, a difference of 0.44.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Mozambique ahead.
Mozambique ranks 116th and Sierra Leone ranks 113th of 183 countries.
Mozambique has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Mozambique | Sierra Leone | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 69.36 | 62.1 | 7.25 | Mozambique |
| 2010s | 75.39 | 72.7 | 2.69 | Mozambique |
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), Mozambique or Sierra Leone?
- Sierra Leone, at 78.57 against 78.13 in Mozambique as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Mozambique and Sierra Leone?
- 0.44, with Sierra Leone ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Mozambique and Sierra Leone?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Mozambique and Sierra Leone rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Mozambique ranks 116th and Sierra Leone ranks 113th of 183 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.