Antigua and Barbuda vs Eswatini: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Antigua and Barbuda
69.35
in 2014
Eswatini
69.35
in 2014
Antigua and Barbuda rank
109th
Eswatini rank
109th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Antigua and Barbuda
- Eswatini
How they compare
Antigua and Barbuda currently reports 69.35 against 69.35 in Eswatini, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
Antigua and Barbuda ranks 109th and Eswatini ranks 109th of 183 countries.
Antigua and Barbuda has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Antigua and Barbuda | Eswatini | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 80.97 | 58.06 | 22.9 | Antigua and Barbuda |
| 2010s | 74.52 | 67.42 | 7.1 | Antigua and Barbuda |
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), Antigua and Barbuda or Eswatini?
- Antigua and Barbuda, at 69.35 against 69.35 in Eswatini as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Antigua and Barbuda and Eswatini?
- 0, with Antigua and Barbuda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Antigua and Barbuda and Eswatini?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Antigua and Barbuda and Eswatini rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Antigua and Barbuda ranks 109th and Eswatini ranks 109th of 183 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
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.