Bolivia vs Eswatini: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Bolivia
44.44
in 2014
Eswatini
44.44
in 2014
Bolivia rank
106th
Eswatini rank
106th

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

  • Bolivia
  • Eswatini
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Bolivia currently reports 44.44 against 44.44 in Eswatini, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Bolivia ahead.

Bolivia ranks 106th and Eswatini ranks 106th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Bolivia Eswatini Difference Ahead
2000s 44.44 33.33 11.11 Bolivia
2010s 44.44 40 4.44 Bolivia

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, Bolivia or Eswatini?
Bolivia, at 44.44 against 44.44 in Eswatini as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between Bolivia and Eswatini?
0, with Bolivia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia and Eswatini?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Bolivia and Eswatini rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Bolivia ranks 106th and Eswatini ranks 106th 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.