Sao Tome and Principe vs Yemen: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Sao Tome and Principe
61.29
in 2014
Yemen
62.9
in 2014
Sao Tome and Principe rank
134th
Yemen rank
131st
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Sao Tome and Principe
- Yemen
How they compare
Yemen currently reports 62.9 against 61.29 in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 1.61.
Across all 10 years both countries report, Yemen has been ahead every year.
Sao Tome and Principe ranks 134th and Yemen ranks 131st of 184 countries.
Yemen has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sao Tome and Principe | Yemen | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 59.68 | 62.26 | 2.58 | Yemen |
| 2010s | 60.97 | 65.48 | 4.52 | Yemen |
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), Sao Tome and Principe or Yemen?
- Yemen, 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 Sao Tome and Principe and Yemen?
- 1.61, with Yemen ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sao Tome and Principe and Yemen?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Sao Tome and Principe and Yemen rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Sao Tome and Principe ranks 134th and Yemen ranks 131st 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.