Solomon Islands vs Thailand: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol
Solomon Islands
76.92
in 2014
Thailand
76.92
in 2014
Solomon Islands rank
27th
Thailand rank
27th
Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15 methodol over time
- Solomon Islands
- Thailand
How they compare
Solomon Islands currently reports 76.92 against 76.92 in Thailand, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Solomon Islands ahead.
Solomon Islands ranks 27th and Thailand ranks 27th of 181 countries.
Solomon Islands has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Solomon Islands | Thailand | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 76.92 | 49.23 | 27.69 | Solomon Islands |
| 2010s | 76.92 | 76.92 | 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, Solomon Islands or Thailand?
- Solomon Islands, at 76.92 against 76.92 in Thailand as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol between Solomon Islands and Thailand?
- 0, with Solomon Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Solomon Islands and Thailand?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Solomon Islands and Thailand rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15 methodol?
- Solomon Islands ranks 27th and Thailand ranks 27th 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
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.