Ukraine vs Yemen: Trading across borders: Time to export (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Ukraine
52.08
in 2014
Yemen
52.08
in 2014
Ukraine rank
149th
Yemen rank
149th

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

  • Ukraine
  • Yemen
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Ukraine currently reports 52.08 against 52.08 in Yemen, a difference of 0.

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

Ukraine ranks 149th and Yemen ranks 149th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Ukraine averaged higher in 1 and Yemen in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ukraine Yemen Difference Ahead
2000s 50 45.42 4.58 Ukraine
2010s 50.83 52.08 1.25 Yemen

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), Ukraine or Yemen?
Ukraine, at 52.08 against 52.08 in Yemen as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Ukraine and Yemen?
0, with Ukraine ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ukraine and Yemen?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ukraine and Yemen rank globally for trading across borders: time to export (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Ukraine ranks 149th and Yemen ranks 149th 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.