Madagascar vs South Africa: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Madagascar
72.58
in 2014
South Africa
72.58
in 2014
Madagascar rank
99th
South Africa rank
99th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Madagascar
- South Africa
How they compare
Madagascar currently reports 72.58 against 72.58 in South Africa, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was South Africa ahead.
Madagascar ranks 99th and South Africa ranks 99th of 183 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Madagascar averaged higher in 1 and South Africa in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Madagascar | South Africa | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 44.19 | 50 | 5.81 | South Africa |
| 2010s | 69.68 | 63.87 | 5.81 | Madagascar |
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), Madagascar or South Africa?
- Madagascar, at 72.58 against 72.58 in South Africa as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Madagascar and South Africa?
- 0, with Madagascar ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Madagascar and South Africa?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Madagascar and South Africa rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Madagascar ranks 99th and South Africa ranks 99th of 183 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.