Hong Kong, China vs Ireland: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15)
Hong Kong, China
92.31
in 2014
Ireland
100
in 2014
Hong Kong, China rank
3rd
Ireland rank
1st
Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15) over time
- Hong Kong, China
- Ireland
How they compare
Ireland currently reports 100 against 92.31 in Hong Kong, China, a difference of 7.69.
That makes Ireland's figure about 1.1 times Hong Kong, China's.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Ireland has been ahead every year.
Hong Kong, China ranks 3rd and Ireland ranks 1st of 184 countries.
Ireland has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Hong Kong, China | Ireland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 84.62 | 100 | 15.38 | Ireland |
| 2010s | 92.31 | 100 | 7.69 | Ireland |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15), Hong Kong, China or Ireland?
- Ireland, at 100 against 92.31 in Hong Kong, China as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15) between Hong Kong, China and Ireland?
- 7.69, with Ireland ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Hong Kong, China and Ireland?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Hong Kong, China and Ireland rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15)?
- Hong Kong, China ranks 3rd and Ireland ranks 1st of 184 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.