Euro area vs Georgia: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Finland (current US$), gaps
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Finland (current US$), gaps over time
- Euro area
- Georgia
How they compare
Euro area currently reports 3.39 million current US$ against 1.23 million current US$ in Georgia, a difference of 2.16 million current US$.
That makes Euro area's figure about 2.8 times Georgia's.
Across all 12 years both countries report, Euro area has been ahead every year.
Euro area ranks 37th and Georgia ranks 36th of 46 groups.
Euro area has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Euro area | Georgia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 13.32 million current US$ | 688,571 current US$ | 12.63 million current US$ | Euro area |
| 2000s | 6.85 million current US$ | 1.19 million current US$ | 5.66 million current US$ | Euro area |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, finland (current us$), gaps, Euro area or Georgia?
- Euro area, at 3.39 million current US$ against 1.23 million current US$ in Georgia as of 2004.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, finland (current us$), gaps between Euro area and Georgia?
- 2.16 million current US$, with Euro area ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Euro area and Georgia?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 1993 to 2004.
- How do Euro area and Georgia rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, finland (current us$), gaps?
- Euro area ranks 37th and Georgia ranks 36th of 46 groups.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Finland (current US$), 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, Finland (current US$) with 415 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.