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

Lesotho
61.54
in 2014
Philippines
61.54
in 2014
Lesotho rank
78th
Philippines rank
78th

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

  • Lesotho
  • Philippines
0204060200520092014

How they compare

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

Across all 10 years both countries report, Philippines has been ahead every year.

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

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Lesotho Philippines Difference Ahead
2000s 53.85 53.85 0
2010s 58.46 61.54 3.08 Philippines

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