Fiji vs Madagascar: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Fiji
46.15
in 2014
Madagascar
46.15
in 2014
Fiji rank
127th
Madagascar rank
127th

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

  • Fiji
  • Madagascar
01020304050200520092014

How they compare

Fiji currently reports 46.15 against 46.15 in Madagascar, a difference of 0.

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

Fiji ranks 127th and Madagascar ranks 127th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Fiji Madagascar Difference Ahead
2000s 46.15 38.46 7.69 Fiji
2010s 46.15 46.15 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, Fiji or Madagascar?
Fiji, at 46.15 against 46.15 in Madagascar as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Fiji and Madagascar?
0, with Fiji ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Fiji and Madagascar?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Fiji and Madagascar rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Fiji ranks 127th and Madagascar ranks 127th 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.