Namibia vs Tunisia: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)

Namibia
74.19
in 2014
Tunisia
74.19
in 2014
Namibia rank
91st
Tunisia rank
91st

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

  • Namibia
  • Tunisia
020406080200520092014

How they compare

Namibia currently reports 74.19 against 74.19 in Tunisia, a difference of 0.

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

Namibia ranks 91st and Tunisia ranks 91st of 181 countries.

Across the 2 decades both report, Namibia averaged higher in 1 and Tunisia in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Namibia Tunisia Difference Ahead
2000s 74.19 66.45 7.74 Namibia
2010s 74.19 78.06 3.87 Tunisia

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), Namibia or Tunisia?
Namibia, at 74.19 against 74.19 in Tunisia as of 2014.
What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Namibia and Tunisia?
0, with Namibia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Namibia and Tunisia?
10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
How do Namibia and Tunisia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
Namibia ranks 91st and Tunisia ranks 91st 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.