Germany vs Luxembourg: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Germany
84.62
in 2014
Luxembourg
84.62
in 2014
Germany rank
11th
Luxembourg rank
11th

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

  • Germany
  • Luxembourg
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Germany currently reports 84.62 against 84.62 in Luxembourg, a difference of 0.

Across all 9 years both countries report, Luxembourg has been ahead every year.

Germany ranks 11th and Luxembourg ranks 11th of 181 countries.

Head to head by decade

Decade Germany Luxembourg Difference Ahead
2000s 84.62 84.62 0
2010s 84.62 84.62 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, Germany or Luxembourg?
Germany, at 84.62 against 84.62 in Luxembourg as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Germany and Luxembourg?
0, with Germany ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Germany and Luxembourg?
9 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2014.
How do Germany and Luxembourg rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Germany ranks 11th and Luxembourg ranks 11th 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.