Bolivia vs Moldova: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Bolivia
61.29
in 2014
Moldova
62.9
in 2014
Bolivia rank
131st
Moldova rank
128th

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

  • Bolivia
  • Moldova
0204060200520092014

How they compare

Moldova currently reports 62.9 against 61.29 in Bolivia, a difference of 1.61.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Moldova ahead.

Bolivia ranks 131st and Moldova ranks 128th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Bolivia averaged higher in 1 and Moldova in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bolivia Moldova Difference Ahead
2000s 56.77 57.74 0.9677 Moldova
2010s 67.42 60.32 7.1 Bolivia

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), Bolivia or Moldova?
Moldova, at 62.9 against 61.29 in Bolivia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Bolivia and Moldova?
1.61, with Moldova ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bolivia and Moldova?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Bolivia and Moldova rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Bolivia ranks 131st and Moldova ranks 128th 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.