Canada vs Iceland: Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square

Canada
167,487 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Iceland
168,745 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Canada rank
115th
Iceland rank
113th

Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square over time

  • Canada
  • Iceland
50.0k100.0k150.0k196119922023

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 168,745 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 167,487 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Canada, a difference of 1,258 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 7 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Canada ahead.

Canada ranks 115th and Iceland ranks 113th of 169 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Canada averaged higher in 2 and Iceland in 4.

Head to head by decade

Decade Canada Iceland Difference Ahead
1970s 49,962 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 42,314 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 7,648 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Canada
1980s 65,158 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 66,418 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 1,260 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Iceland
1990s 80,713 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 83,474 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,761 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Iceland
2000s 106,808 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 118,737 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 11,929 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Iceland
2010s 136,338 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 131,566 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 4,772 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Canada
2020s 157,466 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 160,675 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 3,208 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Iceland

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square, Canada or Iceland?
Iceland, at 168,745 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 167,487 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Canada as of 2023.
What is the difference in final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square between Canada and Iceland?
1,258 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Canada and Iceland?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Canada and Iceland rank globally for final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square?
Canada ranks 115th and Iceland ranks 113th of 169 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre. 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

Canada vs Iceland: Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 11 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/final-consumption-expenditure-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/canada/iceland/

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/final-consumption-expenditure-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/canada/iceland/">Canada vs Iceland: Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre
Unit
constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
211 places, 8,516 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Final consumption expenditure (constant 2015 US$) divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.