Czechia vs Peru: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Czechia
79.03
in 2014
Peru
79.03
in 2014
Czechia rank
75th
Peru rank
75th

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

  • Czechia
  • Peru
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Czechia currently reports 79.03 against 79.03 in Peru, a difference of 0.

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

Czechia ranks 75th and Peru ranks 75th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Czechia averaged higher in 1 and Peru in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Czechia Peru Difference Ahead
2000s 76.13 62.58 13.55 Czechia
2010s 77.1 79.03 1.94 Peru

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), Czechia or Peru?
Czechia, at 79.03 against 79.03 in Peru as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Czechia and Peru?
0, with Czechia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Czechia and Peru?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Czechia and Peru rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Czechia ranks 75th and Peru ranks 75th 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.