Angola vs Lao PDR: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Angola
11.11
in 2014
Lao PDR
11.11
in 2014
Angola rank
167th
Lao PDR rank
167th

Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol over time

  • Angola
  • Lao PDR
05101520200520092014

How they compare

Angola currently reports 11.11 against 11.11 in Lao PDR, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Angola ahead.

Angola ranks 167th and Lao PDR ranks 167th of 181 countries.

Angola has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Angola Lao PDR Difference Ahead
2000s 13.33 6.67 6.67 Angola
2010s 17.78 11.11 6.67 Angola

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol, Angola or Lao PDR?
Angola, at 11.11 against 11.11 in Lao PDR as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between Angola and Lao PDR?
0, with Angola ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Lao PDR?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Angola and Lao PDR rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Angola ranks 167th and Lao PDR ranks 167th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 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: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
183 places, 1,813 data points, 2005–2014
Last refreshed

The score for the number of documents to export 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.