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

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

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

  • Italy
  • Tanzania
020406080200520092014

How they compare

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

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

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

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Italy Tanzania Difference Ahead
2000s 70.83 60 10.83 Italy
2010s 71.67 72.5 0.8333 Tanzania

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