Cuba vs India: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (constant 2015 US$), per

Cuba
785,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
India
982,275 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Cuba rank
72nd
India rank
69th

Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (constant 2015 US$), per over time

  • Cuba
  • India
0200.0k400.0k600.0k800.0k1.0M196119922023

How they compare

India currently reports 982,275 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 785,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba, a difference of 196,863 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes India's figure about 1.3 times Cuba's.

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

Cuba ranks 72nd and India ranks 69th of 192 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Cuba averaged higher in 5 and India in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cuba India Difference Ahead
1970s 276,002 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 70,512 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 205,491 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1980s 454,708 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 106,288 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 348,420 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1990s 383,672 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 181,619 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 202,053 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2000s 541,353 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 333,714 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 207,639 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2010s 801,261 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 633,931 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 167,331 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2020s 786,785 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 883,488 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre 96,702 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre India

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gross value added at basic prices (gva) (constant 2015 us$), per, Cuba or India?
India, at 982,275 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre against 785,412 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba as of 2023.
What is the difference in gross value added at basic prices (gva) (constant 2015 us$), per between Cuba and India?
196,863 constant 2015 US$ per square kilometre, with India ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cuba and India?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Cuba and India rank globally for gross value added at basic prices (gva) (constant 2015 us$), per?
Cuba ranks 72nd and India ranks 69th of 192 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (constant 2015 US$), 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 India: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (constant 2015 US$), per. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 30 August 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/gross-value-added-at-basic-prices-gva-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/india/

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-value-added-at-basic-prices-gva-constant-2015-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/india/">Cuba vs India: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (constant 2015 US$), per</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (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
226 places, 9,168 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (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.