Ethiopia vs Mongolia: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Ethiopia
35.48
in 2014
Mongolia
33.87
in 2014
Ethiopia rank
162nd
Mongolia rank
164th

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

  • Ethiopia
  • Mongolia
010203040200520092014

How they compare

Ethiopia currently reports 35.48 against 33.87 in Mongolia, a difference of 1.61.

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

Ethiopia ranks 162nd and Mongolia ranks 164th of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Ethiopia averaged higher in 1 and Mongolia in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ethiopia Mongolia Difference Ahead
2000s 39.35 36.13 3.23 Ethiopia
2010s 35.48 35.81 0.3226 Mongolia

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), Ethiopia or Mongolia?
Ethiopia, at 35.48 against 33.87 in Mongolia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Ethiopia and Mongolia?
1.61, with Ethiopia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ethiopia and Mongolia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Ethiopia and Mongolia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Ethiopia ranks 162nd and Mongolia ranks 164th 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.