Croatia vs Tunisia: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Croatia
79.17
in 2014
Tunisia
79.17
in 2014
Croatia rank
74th
Tunisia rank
74th

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

  • Croatia
  • Tunisia
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Croatia currently reports 79.17 against 79.17 in Tunisia, a difference of 0.

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

Croatia ranks 74th and Tunisia ranks 74th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Croatia Tunisia Difference Ahead
2000s 65 81.25 16.25 Tunisia
2010s 73.33 84.17 10.83 Tunisia

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), Croatia or Tunisia?
Croatia, at 79.17 against 79.17 in Tunisia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Croatia and Tunisia?
0, with Croatia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Tunisia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Croatia and Tunisia rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Croatia ranks 74th and Tunisia ranks 74th 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.