Is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Congo?

Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.

Where does this Congo data come from?

The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Congo

Name: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Congo
Creator: World Bank
License: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)

Congo: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( was 55.71 in 2019. ▬ Flat

Latest (2019)

55.71

Change on year

unchanged

World rank

161st

of 188 countries

All-time high

55.71

in 2014

All-time low

55.71

in 2014

Years of data

2014–2019

Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) ( in Congo, 2014–2019

Source: World Bank.

Analysis

Congo recorded 55.71 for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in 2019. That is the highest value across all 6 years on record.

The figure is unchanged over ten years.

That places Congo 161st out of 188 countries with data for 2019, putting it in the bottom quarter.

Countries ranked near Congo

158 Qatar 58.57 compare
159 Uganda 57.77 compare
160 Somalia 57.14 compare
162 Kuwait 52.6 compare
163 South Sudan 50 compare
164 Bangladesh 47.14 compare

See the full ranking of 190 places →

More reference data data for Congo

Emission Totals - Indirect emissions (N2O) - Agricultural Soils 0.2108 (2050)
Spring temperature anomalies 0.3226 °C (2026)
Temperature anomalies by month 0.8729 °C (2026)
Summer temperature anomalies 0.6423 °C (2026)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Manure left on Pa 241.83 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5) - IPCC Agriculture 490.66 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Agricultural Soil 265.29 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from N2O (AR5) - Crop Residues 4.5 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5) - Enteric Fermentat 461.27 (2050)
Emission Totals - Emissions (CO2eq) from CH4 (AR5) - Burning - Crop re 3.51 (2050)

All data for Congo →

Frequently asked questions

What is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Congo?: Trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( in Congo was 55.71 in 2019, according to the World Bank.
What is the highest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Congo?: The highest recorded value was 55.71 in 2014.
What is the lowest trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( recorded in Congo?: The lowest recorded value was 55.71 in 2014.
How does Congo rank for trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) (?: Congo ranks 161st out of 188 countries with data for 2019.
Is trading across borders: cost to import: documentary compliance (usd) ( rising or falling in Congo?: Over the last ten years it is unchanged. The long-run trend across the full record is flat.
Where does this Congo data come from?: The figures come from the World Bank, published as part of Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score. Statizoid updates them automatically from the source API.

Download this data

CSV · JSON — 6 observations, free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data).

About this data

Indicator: Trading across borders: Cost to import: Documentary compliance (USD) (DB16-20 methodology) - Score
Source: World Bank
Licence: CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage: 190 places, 1,139 data points, 2014–2019
Last refreshed: 10 August 2026

The score for the cost 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.