Cameroon vs Malawi: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Cameroon
23.08
in 2014
Malawi
23.08
in 2014
Cameroon rank
170th
Malawi rank
170th

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

  • Cameroon
  • Malawi
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Cameroon currently reports 23.08 against 23.08 in Malawi, a difference of 0.

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

Cameroon ranks 170th and Malawi ranks 170th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Cameroon averaged higher in 1 and Malawi in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cameroon Malawi Difference Ahead
2000s 33.85 30.77 3.08 Cameroon
2010s 23.08 24.62 1.54 Malawi

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, Cameroon or Malawi?
Cameroon, at 23.08 against 23.08 in Malawi as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Cameroon and Malawi?
0, with Cameroon ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cameroon and Malawi?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Cameroon and Malawi rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Cameroon ranks 170th and Malawi ranks 170th 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.