Ecuador vs Vietnam: Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score

Ecuador
71.15
in 2019
Vietnam
70.83
in 2019
Ecuador rank
102nd
Vietnam rank
103rd

Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score over time

  • Ecuador
  • Vietnam
020406080201420162019

How they compare

Ecuador currently reports 71.15 against 70.83 in Vietnam, a difference of 0.32.

Across all 6 years both countries report, Ecuador has been ahead every year.

Ecuador ranks 102nd and Vietnam ranks 103rd of 188 countries.

Ecuador has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score, Ecuador or Vietnam?
Ecuador, at 71.15 against 70.83 in Vietnam as of 2019.
What is the difference in trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score between Ecuador and Vietnam?
0.32, with Ecuador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Vietnam?
6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
How do Ecuador and Vietnam rank globally for trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score?
Ecuador ranks 102nd and Vietnam ranks 103rd of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

Doing Business measures the time and cost associated with three sets of procedures of exporting and importing goods —documentary compliance, border compliance and domestic transport—within the overall process of exporting or importing a shipment of goods. The score for trading across borders is the simple average of the scores for the time and cost for documentary compliance and border compliance to export and import. It is computed based on the methodology in the DB16-20 studies.