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

Eswatini
44.44
in 2014
Rwanda
44.44
in 2014
Eswatini rank
106th
Rwanda rank
106th

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

  • Eswatini
  • Rwanda
010203040200520092014

How they compare

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

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

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

Across the 2 decades both report, Eswatini averaged higher in 1 and Rwanda in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eswatini Rwanda Difference Ahead
2000s 33.33 20 13.33 Eswatini
2010s 40 44.44 4.44 Rwanda

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