Democratic Republic of Congo vs Equatorial Guinea: Trading across borders: Time to export: Documentary compliance (hours)
Democratic Republic of Congo
0
in 2019
Equatorial Guinea
9.47
in 2019
Democratic Republic of Congo rank
180th
Equatorial Guinea rank
177th
Trading across borders: Time to export: Documentary compliance (hours) over time
- Democratic Republic of Congo
- Equatorial Guinea
How they compare
Equatorial Guinea currently reports 9.47 against 0 in Democratic Republic of Congo, a difference of 9.47.
Across all 6 years both countries report, Equatorial Guinea has been ahead every year.
Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 180th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 177th of 188 countries.
Equatorial Guinea 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), Democratic Republic of Congo or Equatorial Guinea?
- Equatorial Guinea, at 9.47 against 0 in Democratic Republic of Congo as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to export: documentary compliance (hours) between Democratic Republic of Congo and Equatorial Guinea?
- 9.47, with Equatorial Guinea ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Democratic Republic of Congo and Equatorial Guinea?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Democratic Republic of Congo and Equatorial Guinea rank globally for trading across borders: time to export: documentary compliance (hours)?
- Democratic Republic of Congo ranks 180th and Equatorial Guinea ranks 177th 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
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.