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

Mongolia
33.87
in 2014
Zambia
20.97
in 2014
Mongolia rank
164th
Zambia rank
167th

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

  • Mongolia
  • Zambia
10203040200520092014

How they compare

Mongolia currently reports 33.87 against 20.97 in Zambia, a difference of 12.9.

That makes Mongolia's figure about 1.6 times Zambia's.

Across all 10 years both countries report, Mongolia has been ahead every year.

Mongolia ranks 164th and Zambia ranks 167th of 181 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Mongolia Zambia Difference Ahead
2000s 36.13 11.29 24.84 Mongolia
2010s 35.81 19.03 16.77 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), Mongolia or Zambia?
Mongolia, at 33.87 against 20.97 in Zambia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Mongolia and Zambia?
12.9, with Mongolia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Mongolia and Zambia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Mongolia and Zambia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Mongolia ranks 164th and Zambia ranks 167th 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.