Russia vs Suriname: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Russia
68.54
in 2014
Suriname
66.67
in 2014
Russia rank
116th
Suriname rank
117th

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

  • Russia
  • Suriname
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Russia currently reports 68.54 against 66.67 in Suriname, a difference of 1.87.

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

Russia ranks 116th and Suriname ranks 117th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Russia Suriname Difference Ahead
2000s 62.5 70.83 8.33 Suriname
2010s 64.92 68.33 3.42 Suriname

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), Russia or Suriname?
Russia, at 68.54 against 66.67 in Suriname as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Russia and Suriname?
1.87, with Russia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Russia and Suriname?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Russia and Suriname rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Russia ranks 116th and Suriname 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.