China vs Guatemala: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre

China
7.82 million current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Guatemala
7.51 million current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
China rank
103rd
Guatemala rank
105th

Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre over time

  • China
  • Guatemala
02.0M4.0M6.0M8.0M196119922023

How they compare

China currently reports 7.82 million current LCU per square kilometre against 7.51 million current LCU per square kilometre in Guatemala, a difference of 310,410 current LCU per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was China ahead.

China ranks 103rd and Guatemala ranks 105th of 185 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, China averaged higher in 2 and Guatemala in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade China Guatemala Difference Ahead
1960s 12,316 current LCU per square kilometre 11,440 current LCU per square kilometre 875.99 current LCU per square kilometre China
1970s 20,212 current LCU per square kilometre 30,250 current LCU per square kilometre 10,038 current LCU per square kilometre Guatemala
1980s 63,489 current LCU per square kilometre 112,115 current LCU per square kilometre 48,626 current LCU per square kilometre Guatemala
1990s 350,326 current LCU per square kilometre 699,464 current LCU per square kilometre 349,138 current LCU per square kilometre Guatemala
2000s 1.16 million current LCU per square kilometre 1.89 million current LCU per square kilometre 732,548 current LCU per square kilometre Guatemala
2010s 4.01 million current LCU per square kilometre 4.13 million current LCU per square kilometre 120,168 current LCU per square kilometre Guatemala
2020s 6.99 million current LCU per square kilometre 6.45 million current LCU per square kilometre 541,028 current LCU per square kilometre China

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre, China or Guatemala?
China, at 7.82 million current LCU per square kilometre against 7.51 million current LCU per square kilometre in Guatemala as of 2023.
What is the difference in final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre between China and Guatemala?
310,410 current LCU per square kilometre, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for China and Guatemala?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do China and Guatemala rank globally for final consumption expenditure (current lcu), per square kilometre?
China ranks 103rd and Guatemala ranks 105th of 185 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), 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

China vs Guatemala: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 23 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/final-consumption-expenditure-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre/china/guatemala/

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-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre/china/guatemala/">China vs Guatemala: Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Final consumption expenditure (current LCU), per square kilometre
Unit
current LCU per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
185 places, 8,200 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Final consumption expenditure (current LCU) 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.