Iceland vs Pakistan: Gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 US$), per square

Iceland
55,846 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Pakistan
53,862 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Iceland rank
96th
Pakistan rank
99th

Gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 US$), per square over time

  • Iceland
  • Pakistan
020.0k40.0k60.0k80.0k196119922023

How they compare

Iceland currently reports 55,846 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 53,862 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Pakistan, a difference of 1,984 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Pakistan ahead.

Iceland ranks 96th and Pakistan ranks 99th of 159 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Iceland averaged higher in 1 and Pakistan in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade Iceland Pakistan Difference Ahead
1970s 14,921 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 11,750 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 3,171 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Iceland
1980s 18,398 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 20,481 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 2,083 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Pakistan
1990s 20,320 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 30,820 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 10,500 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Pakistan
2000s 36,860 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 42,416 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 5,557 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Pakistan
2010s 32,349 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 54,697 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 22,348 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Pakistan
2020s 48,547 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 59,644 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 11,097 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Pakistan

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 us$), per square, Iceland or Pakistan?
Iceland, at 55,846 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 53,862 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Pakistan as of 2023.
What is the difference in gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 us$), per square between Iceland and Pakistan?
1,984 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Iceland ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Iceland and Pakistan?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Iceland and Pakistan rank globally for gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 us$), per square?
Iceland ranks 96th and Pakistan ranks 99th of 159 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 US$), 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

Iceland vs Pakistan: Gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 US$), per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 11 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/gross-fixed-capital-formation-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/pakistan/

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/gross-fixed-capital-formation-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/iceland/pakistan/">Iceland vs Pakistan: Gross fixed capital formation (constant 2015 US$), per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Gross fixed capital formation (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
192 places, 7,629 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Gross fixed capital formation (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.