Botswana vs East Timor: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Botswana
56.25
in 2014
East Timor
54.17
in 2014
Botswana rank
143rd
East Timor rank
145th

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

  • Botswana
  • East Timor
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Botswana currently reports 56.25 against 54.17 in East Timor, a difference of 2.08.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was East Timor ahead.

Botswana ranks 143rd and East Timor ranks 145th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and East Timor in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Botswana East Timor Difference Ahead
2000s 45.83 54.17 8.33 East Timor
2010s 55.42 54.17 1.25 Botswana

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), Botswana or East Timor?
Botswana, at 56.25 against 54.17 in East Timor as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Botswana and East Timor?
2.08, with Botswana ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and East Timor?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Botswana and East Timor rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Botswana ranks 143rd and East Timor ranks 145th 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.