Ghana vs Tanzania: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Ghana
72.92
in 2014
Tanzania
75
in 2014
Ghana rank
95th
Tanzania rank
92nd

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

  • Ghana
  • Tanzania
20406080200520092014

How they compare

Tanzania currently reports 75 against 72.92 in Ghana, a difference of 2.08.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Tanzania ahead.

Ghana ranks 95th and Tanzania ranks 92nd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Ghana Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 60.42 60 0.4167 Ghana
2010s 72.92 72.5 0.4167 Ghana

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), Ghana or Tanzania?
Tanzania, at 75 against 72.92 in Ghana as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Ghana and Tanzania?
2.08, with Tanzania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ghana and Tanzania?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ghana and Tanzania rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Ghana ranks 95th and Tanzania ranks 92nd 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.