Bosnia and Herzegovina vs Comoros: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15)
Bosnia and Herzegovina
53.85
in 2014
Comoros
53.85
in 2014
Bosnia and Herzegovina rank
108th
Comoros rank
108th
Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15) over time
- Bosnia and Herzegovina
- Comoros
How they compare
Bosnia and Herzegovina currently reports 53.85 against 53.85 in Comoros, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 108th and Comoros ranks 108th of 184 countries.
Bosnia and Herzegovina has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Bosnia and Herzegovina | Comoros | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 56.92 | 53.85 | 3.08 | Bosnia and Herzegovina |
| 2010s | 53.85 | 53.85 | 0 | — |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15), Bosnia and Herzegovina or Comoros?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina, at 53.85 against 53.85 in Comoros as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15) between Bosnia and Herzegovina and Comoros?
- 0, with Bosnia and Herzegovina ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Bosnia and Herzegovina and Comoros?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Bosnia and Herzegovina and Comoros rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15)?
- Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks 108th and Comoros ranks 108th of 184 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
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.