Micronesia (country) vs Palau: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Micronesia (country)
66.67
in 2014
Palau
66.67
in 2014
Micronesia (country) rank
44th
Palau rank
44th

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

  • Micronesia (country)
  • Palau
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Micronesia (country) currently reports 66.67 against 66.67 in Palau, a difference of 0.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Palau has been ahead every year.

Micronesia (country) ranks 44th and Palau ranks 44th of 181 countries.

Head to head by decade

Decade Micronesia (country) Palau Difference Ahead
2000s 66.67 66.67 0
2010s 66.67 66.67 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 methodol, Micronesia (country) or Palau?
Micronesia (country), at 66.67 against 66.67 in Palau as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between Micronesia (country) and Palau?
0, with Micronesia (country) ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Micronesia (country) and Palau?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Micronesia (country) and Palau rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Micronesia (country) ranks 44th and Palau ranks 44th 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.