Mauritania vs Nepal: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Mauritania
45.16
in 2014
Nepal
43.55
in 2014
Mauritania rank
155th
Nepal rank
157th

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

  • Mauritania
  • Nepal
01020304050200520092014

How they compare

Mauritania currently reports 45.16 against 43.55 in Nepal, a difference of 1.61.

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

Mauritania ranks 155th and Nepal ranks 157th of 181 countries.

Nepal has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Mauritania Nepal Difference Ahead
2000s 41.94 50 8.06 Nepal
2010s 44.52 46.45 1.94 Nepal

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), Mauritania or Nepal?
Mauritania, at 45.16 against 43.55 in Nepal as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Mauritania and Nepal?
1.61, with Mauritania ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mauritania and Nepal?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Mauritania and Nepal rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Mauritania ranks 155th and Nepal ranks 157th 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.