Russia vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15)
Russia
60.47
in 2014
Saint Kitts and Nevis
60.11
in 2014
Russia rank
156th
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
157th
Trading across borders: Cost to import (US$ per container)(DB06-15) over time
- Russia
- Saint Kitts and Nevis
How they compare
Russia currently reports 60.47 against 60.11 in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0.36.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.
Russia ranks 156th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 157th of 184 countries.
Saint Kitts and Nevis has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Russia | Saint Kitts and Nevis | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 37.28 | 56.14 | 18.86 | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
| 2010s | 51.46 | 59.03 | 7.57 | Saint Kitts and Nevis |
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), Russia or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- Russia, at 60.47 against 60.11 in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15) between Russia and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 0.36, with Russia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Russia and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Russia and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for trading across borders: cost to import (us$ per container)(db06-15)?
- Russia ranks 156th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 157th of 184 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.