Guinea vs Myanmar: Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score

Guinea
47.82
in 2019
Myanmar
47.67
in 2019
Guinea rank
165th
Myanmar rank
166th

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

  • Guinea
  • Myanmar
0204060201420162019

How they compare

Guinea currently reports 47.82 against 47.67 in Myanmar, a difference of 0.15.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Myanmar ahead.

Guinea ranks 165th and Myanmar ranks 166th of 188 countries.

Myanmar 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, Guinea or Myanmar?
Guinea, at 47.82 against 47.67 in Myanmar as of 2019.
What is the difference in trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score between Guinea and Myanmar?
0.15, with Guinea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guinea and Myanmar?
6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
How do Guinea and Myanmar rank globally for trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score?
Guinea ranks 165th and Myanmar ranks 166th 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.