Belarus vs Philippines: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Belarus
81.25
in 2014
Philippines
81.25
in 2014
Belarus rank
63rd
Philippines rank
63rd

Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time

  • Belarus
  • Philippines
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Belarus currently reports 81.25 against 81.25 in Philippines, a difference of 0.

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

Belarus ranks 63rd and Philippines ranks 63rd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Belarus Philippines Difference Ahead
2000s 70.83 77.92 7.08 Philippines
2010s 81.25 81.25 0

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology), Belarus or Philippines?
Belarus, at 81.25 against 81.25 in Philippines as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Belarus and Philippines?
0, with Belarus ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belarus and Philippines?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Belarus and Philippines rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Belarus ranks 63rd and Philippines ranks 63rd of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (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: Time to export (days) (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 time to export 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.