Malawi vs Palestine, State of: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Malawi
43.55
in 2014
Palestine, State of
45.16
in 2014
Malawi rank
160th
Palestine, State of rank
158th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Malawi
- Palestine, State of
How they compare
Palestine, State of currently reports 45.16 against 43.55 in Malawi, a difference of 1.61.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Palestine, State of has been ahead every year.
Malawi ranks 160th and Palestine, State of ranks 158th of 184 countries.
Palestine, State of has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Malawi | Palestine, State of | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 20.32 | 41.94 | 21.61 | Palestine, State of |
| 2010s | 37.1 | 43.87 | 6.77 | Palestine, State of |
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), Malawi or Palestine, State of?
- Palestine, State of, at 45.16 against 43.55 in Malawi as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Malawi and Palestine, State of?
- 1.61, with Palestine, State of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Malawi and Palestine, State of?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Malawi and Palestine, State of rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Malawi ranks 160th and Palestine, State of ranks 158th of 184 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.