Ethiopia vs Tanzania: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Ethiopia
30.77
in 2014
Tanzania
30.77
in 2014
Ethiopia rank
159th
Tanzania rank
159th

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

  • Ethiopia
  • Tanzania
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Ethiopia currently reports 30.77 against 30.77 in Tanzania, a difference of 0.

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

Ethiopia ranks 159th and Tanzania ranks 159th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Ethiopia averaged higher in 1 and Tanzania in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ethiopia Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 30.77 24.62 6.15 Ethiopia
2010s 30.77 32.31 1.54 Tanzania

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, Ethiopia or Tanzania?
Ethiopia, at 30.77 against 30.77 in Tanzania as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Ethiopia and Tanzania?
0, with Ethiopia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ethiopia and Tanzania?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ethiopia and Tanzania rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Ethiopia ranks 159th and Tanzania ranks 159th 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.