Guyana vs Italy: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Guyana
72.92
in 2014
Italy
72.92
in 2014
Guyana rank
95th
Italy rank
95th

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

  • Guyana
  • Italy
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Guyana currently reports 72.92 against 72.92 in Italy, a difference of 0.

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

Guyana ranks 95th and Italy ranks 95th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Guyana averaged higher in 1 and Italy in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guyana Italy Difference Ahead
2000s 69.17 70.83 1.67 Italy
2010s 72.92 71.67 1.25 Guyana

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