Moldova vs Nigeria: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Moldova
64.58
in 2014
Nigeria
64.75
in 2014
Moldova rank
125th
Nigeria rank
124th

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

  • Moldova
  • Nigeria
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Nigeria currently reports 64.75 against 64.58 in Moldova, a difference of 0.17.

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

Moldova ranks 125th and Nigeria ranks 124th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Moldova Nigeria Difference Ahead
2000s 64.58 52.92 11.67 Moldova
2010s 64.58 63.4 1.18 Moldova

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), Moldova or Nigeria?
Nigeria, at 64.75 against 64.58 in Moldova as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Moldova and Nigeria?
0.17, with Nigeria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Moldova and Nigeria?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Moldova and Nigeria rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Moldova ranks 125th and Nigeria ranks 124th 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.