Philippines vs Tunisia: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met
Philippines
90.29
in 2014
Tunisia
90.38
in 2014
Philippines rank
42nd
Tunisia rank
40th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15 met over time
- Philippines
- Tunisia
How they compare
Tunisia currently reports 90.38 against 90.29 in Philippines, a difference of 0.09.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Tunisia ahead.
Philippines ranks 42nd and Tunisia ranks 40th of 181 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Philippines averaged higher in 1 and Tunisia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Philippines | Tunisia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 88.03 | 89.29 | 1.26 | Tunisia |
| 2010s | 92.74 | 89.66 | 3.08 | Philippines |
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, Philippines or Tunisia?
- Tunisia, at 90.38 against 90.29 in Philippines as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met between Philippines and Tunisia?
- 0.09, with Tunisia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Philippines and Tunisia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Philippines and Tunisia rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15 met?
- Philippines ranks 42nd and Tunisia ranks 40th 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.