Jordan vs Lesotho: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Jordan
61.54
in 2014
Lesotho
61.54
in 2014
Jordan rank
78th
Lesotho rank
78th

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

  • Jordan
  • Lesotho
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Jordan currently reports 61.54 against 61.54 in Lesotho, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Lesotho ahead.

Jordan ranks 78th and Lesotho ranks 78th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Jordan Lesotho Difference Ahead
2000s 53.85 53.85 0.0001 Jordan
2010s 61.54 58.46 3.08 Jordan

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, Jordan or Lesotho?
Jordan, at 61.54 against 61.54 in Lesotho as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Jordan and Lesotho?
0, with Jordan ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Jordan and Lesotho?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Jordan and Lesotho rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Jordan ranks 78th and Lesotho ranks 78th 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.