Algeria vs Indonesia: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Algeria
64.52
in 2014
Indonesia
64.52
in 2014
Algeria rank
121st
Indonesia rank
121st

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

  • Algeria
  • Indonesia
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Algeria currently reports 64.52 against 64.52 in Indonesia, a difference of 0.

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

Algeria ranks 121st and Indonesia ranks 121st of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Algeria averaged higher in 1 and Indonesia in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Algeria Indonesia Difference Ahead
2000s 70 62.9 7.1 Algeria
2010s 64.52 65.81 1.29 Indonesia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology), Algeria or Indonesia?
Algeria, at 64.52 against 64.52 in Indonesia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Algeria and Indonesia?
0, with Algeria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Algeria and Indonesia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Algeria and Indonesia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Algeria ranks 121st and Indonesia ranks 121st of 181 countries.
Where does this data come from?
The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to import (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 import (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 import 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.