Iceland vs Rwanda: Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), per square

Iceland
18,746 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
18,551 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Iceland rank
78th
Rwanda rank
79th

Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), per square over time

  • Iceland
  • Rwanda
-50.0k050.0k197019962023

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 18,746 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre against 18,551 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre in Rwanda, a difference of 195 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 12 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Iceland ahead.

Iceland ranks 78th and Rwanda ranks 79th of 200 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Iceland Rwanda Difference Ahead
1970s 100.85 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 152.13 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 51.28 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 93.47 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 679.69 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 586.23 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 429.54 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 159.02 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 270.51 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Iceland
2000s 16,569 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 1,550 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 15,020 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Iceland
2010s -4,454 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 10,097 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 14,551 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 6,931 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 11,641 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre 4,711 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher foreign direct investment, net inflows (bop, current us$), per square, Iceland or Rwanda?
Iceland, at 18,746 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre against 18,551 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre in Rwanda as of 2023.
What is the difference in foreign direct investment, net inflows (bop, current us$), per square between Iceland and Rwanda?
195 BoP, current US$ per square kilometre, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Rwanda?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Iceland and Rwanda rank globally for foreign direct investment, net inflows (bop, current us$), per square?
Iceland ranks 78th and Rwanda ranks 79th of 200 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), 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

Iceland vs Rwanda: Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 16 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/foreign-direct-investment-net-inflows-bop-current-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/rwanda/

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/foreign-direct-investment-net-inflows-bop-current-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/rwanda/">Iceland vs Rwanda: Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
BoP, current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
247 places, 11,736 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

Foreign direct investment, net inflows (BoP, current 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.