Czechia vs Eswatini: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Canada (current US$), gaps
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Canada (current US$), gaps over time
- Czechia
- Eswatini
How they compare
Eswatini currently reports 585,648 current US$ against 490,000 current US$ in Czechia, a difference of 95,648 current US$.
That makes Eswatini's figure about 1.2 times Czechia's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 14 shared years of data; in 1991 it was Eswatini ahead.
Czechia ranks 110th and Eswatini ranks 107th of 167 countries.
Czechia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Czechia | Eswatini | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 1.38 million current US$ | 1.04 million current US$ | 334,444 current US$ | Czechia |
| 2000s | 536,000 current US$ | 326,000 current US$ | 210,000 current US$ | Czechia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, canada (current us$), gaps, Czechia or Eswatini?
- Eswatini, at 585,648 current US$ against 490,000 current US$ in Czechia as of 2023.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, canada (current us$), gaps between Czechia and Eswatini?
- 95,648 current US$, with Eswatini ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Czechia and Eswatini?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 1991 to 2004.
- How do Czechia and Eswatini rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, canada (current us$), gaps?
- Czechia ranks 110th and Eswatini ranks 107th of 167 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Canada (current US$), gaps filled. 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, Canada (current US$) with 239 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.