South Korea vs Kosovo: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol
South Korea
88.89
in 2014
Kosovo
33.33
in 2014
South Korea rank
3rd
Kosovo rank
1st
Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol over time
- South Korea
- Kosovo
How they compare
South Korea currently reports 88.89 against 33.33 in Kosovo, a difference of 55.56.
That makes South Korea's figure about 2.7 times Kosovo's.
Across all 6 years both countries report, South Korea has been ahead every year.
South Korea ranks 3rd and Kosovo ranks 1st of 181 countries.
South Korea has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | South Korea | Kosovo | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 88.89 | 33.33 | 55.56 | South Korea |
| 2010s | 88.89 | 33.33 | 55.56 | South Korea |
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, South Korea or Kosovo?
- South Korea, at 88.89 against 33.33 in Kosovo as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between South Korea and Kosovo?
- 55.56, with South Korea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for South Korea and Kosovo?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2009 to 2014.
- How do South Korea and Kosovo rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
- South Korea ranks 3rd and Kosovo ranks 1st 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.