Croatia vs Greece: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Croatia
83.87
in 2014
Greece
83.87
in 2014
Croatia rank
52nd
Greece rank
52nd

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

  • Croatia
  • Greece
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Croatia currently reports 83.87 against 83.87 in Greece, a difference of 0.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Croatia ahead.

Croatia ranks 52nd and Greece ranks 52nd of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Croatia Greece Difference Ahead
2000s 79.35 75.81 3.55 Croatia
2010s 81.61 80 1.61 Croatia

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), Croatia or Greece?
Croatia, at 83.87 against 83.87 in Greece as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Croatia and Greece?
0, with Croatia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Greece?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Croatia and Greece rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Croatia ranks 52nd and Greece ranks 52nd 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.