Philippines vs Puerto Rico: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Philippines
82.26
in 2014
Puerto Rico
82.26
in 2014
Philippines rank
64th
Puerto Rico rank
64th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Philippines
- Puerto Rico
How they compare
Philippines currently reports 82.26 against 82.26 in Puerto Rico, a difference of 0.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Puerto Rico ahead.
Philippines ranks 64th and Puerto Rico ranks 64th of 183 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Philippines averaged higher in 1 and Puerto Rico in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Philippines | Puerto Rico | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 78.71 | 82.26 | 3.55 | Puerto Rico |
| 2010s | 83.55 | 82.26 | 1.29 | Philippines |
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), Philippines or Puerto Rico?
- Philippines, at 82.26 against 82.26 in Puerto Rico as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Philippines and Puerto Rico?
- 0, with Philippines ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Philippines and Puerto Rico?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Philippines and Puerto Rico rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Philippines ranks 64th and Puerto Rico ranks 64th 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.