Comoros vs Gabon: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Comoros
53.85
in 2014
Gabon
53.85
in 2014
Comoros rank
105th
Gabon rank
105th

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

  • Comoros
  • Gabon
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Comoros currently reports 53.85 against 53.85 in Gabon, a difference of 0.

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

Comoros ranks 105th and Gabon ranks 105th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Comoros Gabon Difference Ahead
2000s 53.85 58.46 4.62 Gabon
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 methodol, Comoros or Gabon?
Comoros, at 53.85 against 53.85 in Gabon as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Comoros and Gabon?
0, with Comoros ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Gabon?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Comoros and Gabon rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Comoros ranks 105th and Gabon ranks 105th 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.