Lithuania vs Malawi: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), gaps over time
- Lithuania
- Malawi
How they compare
Lithuania currently reports 6.99 million current US$ against 6.30 million current US$ in Malawi, a difference of 693,260 current US$.
That makes Lithuania's figure about 1.1 times Malawi's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 14 shared years of data; in 1991 it was Lithuania ahead.
Lithuania ranks 48th and Malawi ranks 49th of 142 countries.
Lithuania has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Lithuania | Malawi | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 13.21 million current US$ | 2.07 million current US$ | 11.14 million current US$ | Lithuania |
| 2000s | 11.72 million current US$ | 8.97 million current US$ | 2.75 million current US$ | Lithuania |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps, Lithuania or Malawi?
- Lithuania, at 6.99 million current US$ against 6.30 million current US$ in Malawi as of 2004.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps between Lithuania and Malawi?
- 693,260 current US$, with Lithuania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Lithuania and Malawi?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 1991 to 2004.
- How do Lithuania and Malawi rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, sweden (current us$), gaps?
- Lithuania ranks 48th and Malawi ranks 49th of 142 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Sweden (current US$), 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, Sweden (current US$) with 332 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.