Latvia vs Lithuania: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Australia (current US$), per
Latvia
1.12 current US$ per square kilometre
in 1996
Lithuania
0.9572 current US$ per square kilometre
in 1996
Latvia rank
89th
Lithuania rank
91st
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Australia (current US$), per over time
- Latvia
- Lithuania
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 1.12 current US$ per square kilometre against 0.9572 current US$ per square kilometre in Lithuania, a difference of 0.1628 current US$ per square kilometre.
That makes Latvia's figure about 1.2 times Lithuania's.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Latvia has been ahead every year.
Latvia ranks 89th and Lithuania ranks 91st of 160 countries.
Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, australia (current us$), per, Latvia or Lithuania?
- Latvia, at 1.12 current US$ per square kilometre against 0.9572 current US$ per square kilometre in Lithuania as of 1996.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, australia (current us$), per between Latvia and Lithuania?
- 0.1628 current US$ per square kilometre, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Lithuania?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 1996.
- How do Latvia and Lithuania rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, australia (current us$), per?
- Latvia ranks 89th and Lithuania ranks 91st of 160 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Australia (current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Australia (current US$) divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.