Equatorial Guinea vs Ghana: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Equatorial Guinea
- Ghana
How they compare
Ghana currently reports 40.32 against 35.48 in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 4.84.
That makes Ghana's figure about 1.1 times Equatorial Guinea's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.
Equatorial Guinea ranks 162nd and Ghana ranks 159th of 181 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Ghana in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Equatorial Guinea | Ghana | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 36.77 | 34.19 | 2.58 | Equatorial Guinea |
| 2010s | 35.48 | 42.26 | 6.77 | 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), Equatorial Guinea or Ghana?
- Ghana, at 40.32 against 35.48 in Equatorial Guinea as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Equatorial Guinea and Ghana?
- 4.84, with Ghana ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Ghana?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Equatorial Guinea and Ghana rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Equatorial Guinea ranks 162nd 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
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.