Cuba vs Guatemala: Gross national expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre

Cuba
816,493 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Guatemala
871,583 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Cuba rank
62nd
Guatemala rank
60th

Gross national expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre over time

  • Cuba
  • Guatemala
0200.0k400.0k600.0k800.0k196119922023

How they compare

Guatemala currently reports 871,583 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 816,493 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba, a difference of 55,090 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Guatemala's figure about 1.1 times Cuba's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Cuba ahead.

Cuba ranks 62nd and Guatemala ranks 60th of 160 countries.

Cuba has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cuba Guatemala Difference Ahead
1970s 317,644 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 177,484 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 140,160 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1980s 522,446 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 221,448 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 300,997 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1990s 416,088 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 307,353 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 108,734 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2000s 542,988 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 457,096 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 85,893 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2010s 786,736 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 627,703 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 159,033 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2020s 817,210 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 806,153 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 11,056 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gross national expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square kilometre, Cuba or Guatemala?
Guatemala, at 871,583 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 816,493 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba as of 2023.
What is the difference in gross national expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square kilometre between Cuba and Guatemala?
55,090 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with Guatemala ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cuba and Guatemala?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Cuba and Guatemala rank globally for gross national expenditure (constant 2015 us$), per square kilometre?
Cuba ranks 62nd and Guatemala ranks 60th of 160 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Gross national expenditure (constant 2015 US$), 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

Cuba vs Guatemala: Gross national expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 08 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/gross-national-expenditure-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/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/gross-national-expenditure-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/guatemala/">Cuba vs Guatemala: Gross national expenditure (constant 2015 US$), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Gross national 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
201 places, 7,891 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Gross national 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.