Hong Kong (China) vs North Macedonia: Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Trading across borders (DB16-20 methodology) - Score over time
- Hong Kong (China)
- North Macedonia
How they compare
Hong Kong (China) currently reports 95.04 against 93.87 in North Macedonia, a difference of 1.17.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Hong Kong (China) has been ahead every year.
Hong Kong (China) ranks 29th and North Macedonia ranks 32nd of 190 countries.
Hong Kong (China) 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, Hong Kong (China) or North Macedonia?
- Hong Kong (China), at 95.04 against 93.87 in North Macedonia as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score between Hong Kong (China) and North Macedonia?
- 1.17, with Hong Kong (China) ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong (China) and North Macedonia?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Hong Kong (China) and North Macedonia rank globally for trading across borders (db16-20 methodology) - score?
- Hong Kong (China) ranks 29th and North Macedonia ranks 32nd of 190 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
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.