China vs Dominican Republic: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol
China
76.92
in 2014
Dominican Republic
76.92
in 2014
China rank
27th
Dominican Republic rank
27th
Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol over time
- China
- Dominican Republic
How they compare
China currently reports 76.92 against 76.92 in Dominican Republic, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was China ahead.
China ranks 27th and Dominican Republic ranks 27th of 181 countries.
China has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | China | Dominican Republic | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 70.77 | 60 | 10.77 | China |
| 2010s | 76.92 | 70.77 | 6.15 | China |
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, China or Dominican Republic?
- China, at 76.92 against 76.92 in Dominican Republic as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between China and Dominican Republic?
- 0, with China ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for China and Dominican Republic?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do China and Dominican Republic rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
- China ranks 27th and Dominican Republic ranks 27th 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
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.