Lebanon vs Madagascar: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Lebanon
66.67
in 2014
Madagascar
66.67
in 2014
Lebanon rank
117th
Madagascar rank
117th

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

  • Lebanon
  • Madagascar
204060200520092014

How they compare

Lebanon currently reports 66.67 against 66.67 in Madagascar, a difference of 0.

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

Lebanon ranks 117th and Madagascar ranks 117th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Lebanon averaged higher in 1 and Madagascar in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Lebanon Madagascar Difference Ahead
2000s 59.58 40.42 19.17 Lebanon
2010s 65.42 66.67 1.25 Madagascar

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), Lebanon or Madagascar?
Lebanon, at 66.67 against 66.67 in Madagascar as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Lebanon and Madagascar?
0, with Lebanon ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Lebanon and Madagascar?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Lebanon and Madagascar rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Lebanon ranks 117th and Madagascar ranks 117th 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.