Estonia vs Malawi: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, France (current US$), gaps
Estonia
2.26 million current US$
in 2004
Malawi
2.22 million current US$
in 2023
Estonia rank
108th
Malawi rank
109th
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, France (current US$), gaps over time
- Estonia
- Malawi
How they compare
Estonia currently reports 2.26 million current US$ against 2.22 million current US$ in Malawi, a difference of 42,890 current US$.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 13 shared years of data; in 1992 it was Malawi ahead.
Estonia ranks 108th and Malawi ranks 109th of 168 countries.
Malawi has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Estonia | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 905,000 current US$ | 3.75 million current US$ | 2.84 million current US$ | Malawi |
| 2000s | 1.44 million current US$ | 1.99 million current US$ | 552,000 current US$ | Malawi |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, france (current us$), gaps, Estonia or Malawi?
- Estonia, at 2.26 million current US$ against 2.22 million current US$ in Malawi as of 2004.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, france (current us$), gaps between Estonia and Malawi?
- 42,890 current US$, with Estonia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Estonia and Malawi?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 1992 to 2004.
- How do Estonia and Malawi rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, france (current us$), gaps?
- Estonia ranks 108th and Malawi ranks 109th of 168 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, France (current US$), 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, France (current US$) with 100 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.