Solomon Islands vs Tunisia: Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology)
Solomon Islands
74.19
in 2014
Tunisia
74.19
in 2014
Solomon Islands rank
93rd
Tunisia rank
93rd
Trading across borders: Time to import (days) (DB06-15 methodology) over time
- Solomon Islands
- Tunisia
How they compare
Solomon Islands 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 Solomon Islands ahead.
Solomon Islands ranks 93rd and Tunisia ranks 93rd of 183 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Solomon Islands averaged higher in 1 and Tunisia in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Solomon Islands | Tunisia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 74.19 | 66.45 | 7.74 | Solomon Islands |
| 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), Solomon Islands or Tunisia?
- Solomon Islands, 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 Solomon Islands and Tunisia?
- 0, with Solomon Islands ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Solomon Islands and Tunisia?
- 10 years are reported by both, from 2005 to 2014.
- How do Solomon Islands and Tunisia rank globally for trading across borders: time to import (days) (db06-15 methodology)?
- Solomon Islands ranks 93rd and Tunisia ranks 93rd 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.