Cape Verde vs Kuwait: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Cape Verde
74.19
in 2014
Kuwait
74.19
in 2014
Cape Verde rank
91st
Kuwait rank
91st

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

  • Cape Verde
  • Kuwait
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Cape Verde currently reports 74.19 against 74.19 in Kuwait, a difference of 0.

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

Cape Verde ranks 91st and Kuwait ranks 91st of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Cape Verde Kuwait Difference Ahead
2000s 73.87 72.9 0.9677 Cape Verde
2010s 76.77 74.19 2.58 Cape Verde

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), Cape Verde or Kuwait?
Cape Verde, at 74.19 against 74.19 in Kuwait as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Cape Verde and Kuwait?
0, with Cape Verde ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cape Verde and Kuwait?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Cape Verde and Kuwait rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Cape Verde ranks 91st and Kuwait ranks 91st 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.