Saint Vincent and the Grenadines vs Tunisia: Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15)
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
69.23
in 2014
Tunisia
69.23
in 2014
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines rank
50th
Tunisia rank
50th
Trading across borders: Documents to import (number) (DB06-15) over time
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
- Tunisia
How they compare
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines currently reports 69.23 against 69.23 in Tunisia, a difference of 0.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Tunisia has been ahead every year.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 50th and Tunisia ranks 50th of 183 countries.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Saint Vincent and the Grenadines | Tunisia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 69.23 | 69.23 | 0 | — |
| 2010s | 69.23 | 69.23 | 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), Saint Vincent and the Grenadines or Tunisia?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, at 69.23 against 69.23 in Tunisia as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15) between Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Tunisia?
- 0, with Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Tunisia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and Tunisia rank globally for trading across borders: documents to import (number) (db06-15)?
- Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ranks 50th and Tunisia ranks 50th of 183 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.