Iran, Islamic Republic of vs Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of: Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance
Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance over time
- Iran, Islamic Republic of
- Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of
How they compare
Iran, Islamic Republic of currently reports 83.68 against 82.01 in Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of, a difference of 1.67.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 6 shared years of data; in 2014 it was Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of ahead.
Iran, Islamic Republic of ranks 103rd and Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of ranks 105th of 190 countries.
Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance, Iran, Islamic Republic of or Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of?
- Iran, Islamic Republic of, at 83.68 against 82.01 in Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of as of 2019.
- What is the difference in trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance between Iran, Islamic Republic of and Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of?
- 1.67, with Iran, Islamic Republic of ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Iran, Islamic Republic of and Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of?
- 6 years are reported by both, from 2014 to 2019.
- How do Iran, Islamic Republic of and Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of rank globally for trading across borders: time to import: documentary compliance?
- Iran, Islamic Republic of ranks 103rd and Timor-Leste, Democratic Republic of ranks 105th of 190 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The World Bank, published as Trading across borders: Time to import: Documentary compliance (hours) (DB16-20 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 for documentary compliance 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 DB16-20 studies.