Eswatini vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita

Eswatini
67,921 current LCU per person
in 2025
Saint Kitts and Nevis
59,431 current LCU per person
in 2025
Eswatini rank
122nd
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
125th

Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita over time

  • Eswatini
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
020.0k40.0k60.0k196019922025

How they compare

Eswatini currently reports 67,921 current LCU per person against 59,431 current LCU per person in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 8,490 current LCU per person.

That makes Eswatini's figure about 1.1 times Saint Kitts and Nevis's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 49 shared years of data; in 1977 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.

Eswatini ranks 122nd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 125th of 205 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Eswatini averaged higher in 1 and Saint Kitts and Nevis in 5.

Head to head by decade

Decade Eswatini Saint Kitts and Nevis Difference Ahead
1970s 462.27 current LCU per person 2,818 current LCU per person 2,355 current LCU per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
1980s 1,069 current LCU per person 6,746 current LCU per person 5,677 current LCU per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
1990s 5,011 current LCU per person 17,350 current LCU per person 12,339 current LCU per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
2000s 17,283 current LCU per person 29,489 current LCU per person 12,206 current LCU per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
2010s 39,881 current LCU per person 47,470 current LCU per person 7,589 current LCU per person Saint Kitts and Nevis
2020s 60,883 current LCU per person 51,063 current LCU per person 9,820 current LCU per person Eswatini

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gross value added at basic prices (gva) (current lcu), per capita, Eswatini or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
Eswatini, at 67,921 current LCU per person against 59,431 current LCU per person in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2025.
What is the difference in gross value added at basic prices (gva) (current lcu), per capita between Eswatini and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
8,490 current LCU per person, with Eswatini ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Eswatini and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
49 years are reported by both, from 1977 to 2025.
How do Eswatini and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for gross value added at basic prices (gva) (current lcu), per capita?
Eswatini ranks 122nd and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 125th of 205 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita. 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

Eswatini vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 28 August 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/gross-value-added-at-basic-prices-gva-current-lcu-per-capita/eswatini/st-kitts-and-nevis/

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-current-lcu-per-capita/eswatini/st-kitts-and-nevis/">Eswatini vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU), per capita
Unit
current LCU per person
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
206 places, 9,147 data points, 1960–2025
Last refreshed

Gross value added at basic prices (GVA) (current LCU) divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.