Burkina Faso vs Romania: Discrepancy in expenditure estimate of GDP
Discrepancy in expenditure estimate of GDP over time
- Burkina Faso
- Romania
How they compare
Romania currently reports 66.04 billion constant LCU against 35.61 billion constant LCU in Burkina Faso, a difference of 30.44 billion constant LCU.
That makes Romania's figure about 1.9 times Burkina Faso's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 11 shared years of data; in 2015 it was Romania ahead.
Burkina Faso ranks 15th and Romania ranks 13th of 154 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Burkina Faso averaged higher in 1 and Romania in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Burkina Faso | Romania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 5.03 billion constant LCU | 23.62 billion constant LCU | 18.59 billion constant LCU | Romania |
| 2020s | 71.12 billion constant LCU | 51.85 billion constant LCU | 19.27 billion constant LCU | Burkina Faso |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher discrepancy in expenditure estimate of gdp, Burkina Faso or Romania?
- Romania, at 66.04 billion constant LCU against 35.61 billion constant LCU in Burkina Faso as of 2025.
- What is the difference in discrepancy in expenditure estimate of gdp between Burkina Faso and Romania?
- 30.44 billion constant LCU, with Romania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Burkina Faso and Romania?
- 11 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2025.
- How do Burkina Faso and Romania rank globally for discrepancy in expenditure estimate of gdp?
- Burkina Faso ranks 15th and Romania ranks 13th of 154 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Country official statistics, National Statistical Organizations and/or Central Banks, published as Discrepancy in expenditure estimate of GDP (constant LCU). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Although the SNA ensures there is perfect consistency between the three measures of GDP, this is a conceptual consistency that in general does not emerge naturally from data compilations. This is because of the wide disparity of data sources that must be called on and the fact that any error in any source will lead to a difference between at least two of the GDP measures. In practice it is inevitable that many such data errors will exist and will become apparent in exercises such as the balancing of supply and use tables. This indicator is expressed in constant prices, meaning the underlying series have been adjusted to account for price changes over time. The reference year for this adjustment varies by country.