Malaysia vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)

Malaysia
0.0573 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP
in 2025
Zimbabwe
0.0545 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP
in 2025
Malaysia rank
85th
Zimbabwe rank
87th

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$) over time

  • Malaysia
  • Zimbabwe
00.511.52196919972025

How they compare

Malaysia currently reports 0.0573 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP against 0.0545 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP in Zimbabwe, a difference of 0.0028 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP.

That makes Malaysia's figure about 1.1 times Zimbabwe's.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 56 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Malaysia ahead.

Malaysia ranks 85th and Zimbabwe ranks 87th of 194 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Malaysia averaged higher in 3 and Zimbabwe in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Malaysia Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1970s 1.08 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.4804 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.5957 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Malaysia
1980s 0.428 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.2645 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.1634 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Malaysia
1990s 0.2264 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.3375 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.1111 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Zimbabwe
2000s 0.1392 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.3598 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.2206 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Zimbabwe
2010s 0.0772 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.0775 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.0002 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Zimbabwe
2020s 0.065 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.0613 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP 0.0037 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP Malaysia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$), Malaysia or Zimbabwe?
Malaysia, at 0.0573 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP against 0.0545 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP in Zimbabwe as of 2025.
What is the difference in agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$) between Malaysia and Zimbabwe?
0.0028 constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP, with Malaysia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Malaysia and Zimbabwe?
56 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2025.
How do Malaysia and Zimbabwe rank globally for agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 us$)?
Malaysia ranks 85th and Zimbabwe ranks 87th of 194 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), per unit of GDP. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Malaysia vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 16 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-2015-us-per-unit-of-gdp/malaysia/zimbabwe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/agriculture-forestry-and-fishing-value-added-constant-2015-us-per-unit-of-gdp/malaysia/zimbabwe/">Malaysia vs Zimbabwe: Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$), per unit of GDP
Unit
constant 2015 US$ per US$ of GDP
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
240 places, 10,602 data points, 1960–2025
Last refreshed

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing, value added (constant 2015 US$) divided by GDP (current US$), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.