Angola vs Kenya: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Angola
46.15
in 2014
Kenya
46.15
in 2014
Angola rank
127th
Kenya rank
127th

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

  • Angola
  • Kenya
1020304050200520092014

How they compare

Angola currently reports 46.15 against 46.15 in Kenya, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Angola ahead.

Angola ranks 127th and Kenya ranks 127th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Angola Kenya Difference Ahead
2000s 53.85 38.46 15.38 Angola
2010s 50.77 46.15 4.62 Angola

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol, Angola or Kenya?
Angola, at 46.15 against 46.15 in Kenya as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Angola and Kenya?
0, with Angola ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Kenya?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Angola and Kenya rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Angola ranks 127th and Kenya ranks 127th of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Documents to import (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 import (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 import 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.