El Salvador vs Romania: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Norway (current US$), gaps
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Norway (current US$), gaps over time
- El Salvador
- Romania
How they compare
Romania currently reports 800,000 current US$ against 728,396 current US$ in El Salvador, a difference of 71,604 current US$.
That makes Romania's figure about 1.1 times El Salvador's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 15 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Romania ahead.
El Salvador ranks 77th and Romania ranks 75th of 143 countries.
El Salvador has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | El Salvador | Romania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 2.56 million current US$ | 452,000 current US$ | 2.11 million current US$ | El Salvador |
| 2000s | 1.54 million current US$ | 546,000 current US$ | 994,000 current US$ | El Salvador |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, norway (current us$), gaps, El Salvador or Romania?
- Romania, at 800,000 current US$ against 728,396 current US$ in El Salvador as of 2004.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, norway (current us$), gaps between El Salvador and Romania?
- 71,604 current US$, with Romania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Romania?
- 15 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2004.
- How do El Salvador and Romania rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, norway (current us$), gaps?
- El Salvador ranks 77th and Romania ranks 75th of 143 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Norway (current US$), 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, Norway (current US$) with 370 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.