Comoros vs Mauritania: Trading across borders: Time to export: Documentary compliance (hours)

Comoros
71.01
in 2019
Mauritania
70.61
in 2019
Comoros rank
128th
Mauritania rank
130th

Trading across borders: Time to export: Documentary compliance (hours) over time

  • Comoros
  • Mauritania
020406080201420162019

How they compare

Comoros currently reports 71.01 against 70.61 in Mauritania, a difference of 0.4.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Comoros ahead.

Comoros ranks 128th and Mauritania ranks 130th of 188 countries.

Mauritania has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: time to export: documentary compliance (hours), Comoros or Mauritania?
Comoros, at 71.01 against 70.61 in Mauritania as of 2019.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export: documentary compliance (hours) between Comoros and Mauritania?
0.4, with Comoros ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Comoros and Mauritania?
6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
How do Comoros and Mauritania rank globally for trading across borders: time to export: documentary compliance (hours)?
Comoros ranks 128th and Mauritania ranks 130th of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to export: Documentary compliance (hours) (DB16-20 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: Documentary compliance (hours) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source
World Bank
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed

The score for the time for documentary compliance 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 DB16-20 studies.