China vs Vanuatu: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

China
68.75
in 2014
Vanuatu
68.75
in 2014
China rank
109th
Vanuatu rank
109th

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

  • China
  • Vanuatu
0204060200520092014

How they compare

China currently reports 68.75 against 68.75 in Vanuatu, a difference of 0.

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

China ranks 109th and Vanuatu ranks 109th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade China Vanuatu Difference Ahead
2000s 67.92 58.33 9.58 China
2010s 68.75 66.67 2.08 China

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), China or Vanuatu?
China, at 68.75 against 68.75 in Vanuatu as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between China and Vanuatu?
0, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China and Vanuatu?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do China and Vanuatu rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
China ranks 109th and Vanuatu ranks 109th 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.