Rwanda vs Sao Tome and Principe: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Rwanda
62.9
in 2014
Sao Tome and Principe
61.29
in 2014
Rwanda rank
131st
Sao Tome and Principe rank
134th
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Rwanda
- Sao Tome and Principe
How they compare
Rwanda currently reports 62.9 against 61.29 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 1.61.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 10 shared years of data; in 2005 it was Sao Tome and Principe ahead.
Rwanda ranks 131st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 134th of 184 countries.
Sao Tome and Principe has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Rwanda | Sao Tome and Principe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 17.74 | 59.68 | 41.94 | Sao Tome and Principe |
| 2010s | 57.1 | 60.97 | 3.87 | Sao Tome and Principe |
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), Rwanda or Sao Tome and Principe?
- Rwanda, at 62.9 against 61.29 in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2014.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology) between Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 1.61, with Rwanda ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Rwanda and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Rwanda ranks 131st and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 134th 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.