Burkina Faso vs Mongolia: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Burkina Faso
27.42
in 2014
Mongolia
33.87
in 2014
Burkina Faso rank
168th
Mongolia rank
166th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Burkina Faso
- Mongolia
How they compare
Mongolia currently reports 33.87 against 27.42 in Burkina Faso, a difference of 6.45.
That makes Mongolia's figure about 1.2 times Burkina Faso's.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Mongolia has been ahead every year.
Burkina Faso ranks 168th and Mongolia ranks 166th of 183 countries.
Mongolia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Burkina Faso | Mongolia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 20.97 | 36.13 | 15.16 | Mongolia |
| 2010s | 28.06 | 35.81 | 7.74 | Mongolia |
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), Burkina Faso or Mongolia?
- Mongolia, at 33.87 against 27.42 in Burkina Faso as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Burkina Faso and Mongolia?
- 6.45, with Mongolia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Burkina Faso and Mongolia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Burkina Faso and Mongolia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Burkina Faso ranks 168th and Mongolia ranks 166th 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.