Ireland vs South Korea: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Ireland
95.83
in 2014
South Korea
95.83
in 2014
Ireland rank
9th
South Korea rank
9th

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

  • Ireland
  • South Korea
020406080100200520092014

How they compare

Ireland currently reports 95.83 against 95.83 in South Korea, a difference of 0.

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

Ireland ranks 9th and South Korea ranks 9th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Ireland South Korea Difference Ahead
2000s 95.83 89.17 6.67 Ireland
2010s 95.83 95.42 0.4167 Ireland

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), Ireland or South Korea?
Ireland, at 95.83 against 95.83 in South Korea as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Ireland and South Korea?
0, with Ireland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ireland and South Korea?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ireland and South Korea rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Ireland ranks 9th and South Korea ranks 9th 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.