Dominican Republic vs Grenada: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol
Dominican Republic
77.78
in 2014
Grenada
77.78
in 2014
Dominican Republic rank
16th
Grenada rank
16th
Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol over time
- Dominican Republic
- Grenada
How they compare
Dominican Republic currently reports 77.78 against 77.78 in Grenada, a difference of 0.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Grenada has been ahead every year.
Dominican Republic ranks 16th and Grenada ranks 16th of 181 countries.
Grenada has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Dominican Republic | Grenada | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 62.22 | 77.78 | 15.56 | Grenada |
| 2010s | 68.89 | 77.78 | 8.89 | Grenada |
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, Dominican Republic or Grenada?
- Dominican Republic, at 77.78 against 77.78 in Grenada as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between Dominican Republic and Grenada?
- 0, with Dominican Republic ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Dominican Republic and Grenada?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Dominican Republic and Grenada rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
- Dominican Republic ranks 16th and Grenada ranks 16th 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
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.