Burundi vs Ghana: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Burundi
37.1
in 2014
Ghana
40.32
in 2014
Burundi rank
160th
Ghana rank
159th

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

  • Burundi
  • Ghana
01020304050200520092014

How they compare

Ghana currently reports 40.32 against 37.1 in Burundi, a difference of 3.22.

That makes Ghana's figure about 1.1 times Burundi's.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Ghana has been ahead every year.

Burundi ranks 160th and Ghana ranks 159th of 181 countries.

Ghana has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Burundi Ghana Difference Ahead
2000s 1.94 34.19 32.26 Ghana
2010s 26.13 42.26 16.13 Ghana

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), Burundi or Ghana?
Ghana, at 40.32 against 37.1 in Burundi as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Burundi and Ghana?
3.22, with Ghana ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Burundi and Ghana?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Burundi and Ghana rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Burundi ranks 160th and Ghana ranks 159th 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.