East Timor vs Vanuatu: Trading across borders: Documents to export (number) (DB06-15 methodol

East Timor
55.56
in 2014
Vanuatu
55.56
in 2014
East Timor rank
76th
Vanuatu rank
76th

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

  • East Timor
  • Vanuatu
0204060200520092014

How they compare

East Timor currently reports 55.56 against 55.56 in Vanuatu, a difference of 0.

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

East Timor ranks 76th and Vanuatu ranks 76th of 181 countries.

Head to head by decade

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