Angola vs Latvia: Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Total (current US$), gaps
Angola
154.24 million current US$
in 2023
Latvia
160.36 million current US$
in 2004
Angola rank
102nd
Latvia rank
100th
Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Total (current US$), gaps over time
- Angola
- Latvia
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 160.36 million current US$ against 154.24 million current US$ in Angola, a difference of 6.12 million current US$.
Across all 14 years both countries report, Angola has been ahead every year.
Angola ranks 102nd and Latvia ranks 100th of 180 countries.
Angola has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Angola | Latvia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 280.89 million current US$ | 62.41 million current US$ | 218.48 million current US$ | Angola |
| 2000s | 471.28 million current US$ | 106.46 million current US$ | 364.82 million current US$ | Angola |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, total (current us$), gaps, Angola or Latvia?
- Latvia, at 160.36 million current US$ against 154.24 million current US$ in Angola as of 2004.
- What is the difference in net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, total (current us$), gaps between Angola and Latvia?
- 6.12 million current US$, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Angola and Latvia?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 1991 to 2004.
- How do Angola and Latvia rank globally for net bilateral aid flows from dac donors, total (current us$), gaps?
- Angola ranks 102nd and Latvia ranks 100th of 180 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Net bilateral aid flows from DAC donors, Total (current US$), 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, Total (current US$) with 50 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.