Moldova vs Saint Lucia: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol

Moldova
30.77
in 2014
Saint Lucia
30.77
in 2014
Moldova rank
159th
Saint Lucia rank
159th

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

  • Moldova
  • Saint Lucia
0102030200520092014

How they compare

Moldova currently reports 30.77 against 30.77 in Saint Lucia, a difference of 0.

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

Moldova ranks 159th and Saint Lucia ranks 159th of 181 countries.

Head to head by decade

Decade Moldova Saint Lucia Difference Ahead
2000s 30.77 30.77 0
2010s 30.77 30.77 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, Moldova or Saint Lucia?
Moldova, at 30.77 against 30.77 in Saint Lucia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Moldova and Saint Lucia?
0, with Moldova ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Moldova and Saint Lucia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Moldova and Saint Lucia rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
Moldova ranks 159th and Saint Lucia ranks 159th 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.