North Macedonia vs Samoa: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol

North Macedonia
55.56
in 2014
Samoa
55.56
in 2014
North Macedonia rank
76th
Samoa rank
76th

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

  • North Macedonia
  • Samoa
0204060200520092014

How they compare

North Macedonia currently reports 55.56 against 55.56 in Samoa, a difference of 0.

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

North Macedonia ranks 76th and Samoa ranks 76th of 181 countries.

Samoa has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade North Macedonia Samoa Difference Ahead
2000s 48.89 55.56 6.67 Samoa
2010s 55.56 55.56 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, North Macedonia or Samoa?
North Macedonia, at 55.56 against 55.56 in Samoa as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol between North Macedonia and Samoa?
0, with North Macedonia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for North Macedonia and Samoa?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do North Macedonia and Samoa rank globally for trading across borders: documents to export (number) (db06-15 methodol?
North Macedonia ranks 76th and Samoa ranks 76th 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.