Hong Kong vs United Arab Emirates: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15)
Hong Kong
88.89
in 2014
United Arab Emirates
88.89
in 2014
Hong Kong rank
3rd
United Arab Emirates rank
3rd
Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15) over time
- Hong Kong
- United Arab Emirates
How they compare
Hong Kong currently reports 88.89 against 88.89 in United Arab Emirates, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was United Arab Emirates ahead.
Hong Kong ranks 3rd and United Arab Emirates ranks 3rd of 184 countries.
Hong Kong has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Hong Kong | United Arab Emirates | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 82.22 | 80 | 2.22 | Hong Kong |
| 2010s | 88.89 | 88.89 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15), Hong Kong or United Arab Emirates?
- Hong Kong, at 88.89 against 88.89 in United Arab Emirates as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15) between Hong Kong and United Arab Emirates?
- 0, with Hong Kong ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong and United Arab Emirates?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Hong Kong and United Arab Emirates rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15)?
- Hong Kong ranks 3rd and United Arab Emirates ranks 3rd of 184 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.