How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Latvia?

29 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2023.

Where does this data come from?

Statizoid (derived), published as Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU), per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Ecuador vs Latvia: Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU)

Ecuador

302,982 constant LCU per square kilometre

in 2023

Latvia

292,881 constant LCU per square kilometre

in 2023

Ecuador rank

151st

Latvia rank

153rd

Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU) over time

Ecuador
Latvia

How they compare

Ecuador currently reports 302,982 constant LCU per square kilometre against 292,881 constant LCU per square kilometre in Latvia, a difference of 10,101 constant LCU per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 8 times across 29 shared years of data; in 1995 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 151st and Latvia ranks 153rd of 175 countries.

Across the 4 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 2 and Latvia in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade	Ecuador	Latvia	Difference	Ahead
1990s	155,924 constant LCU per square kilometre	127,127 constant LCU per square kilometre	28,797 constant LCU per square kilometre	Ecuador
2000s	172,248 constant LCU per square kilometre	198,119 constant LCU per square kilometre	25,871 constant LCU per square kilometre	Latvia
2010s	250,257 constant LCU per square kilometre	244,956 constant LCU per square kilometre	5,300 constant LCU per square kilometre	Ecuador
2020s	279,846 constant LCU per square kilometre	282,523 constant LCU per square kilometre	2,677 constant LCU per square kilometre	Latvia

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher households and npishs final consumption expenditure (constant lcu), Ecuador or Latvia?: Ecuador, at 302,982 constant LCU per square kilometre against 292,881 constant LCU per square kilometre in Latvia as of 2023.
What is the difference in households and npishs final consumption expenditure (constant lcu) between Ecuador and Latvia?: 10,101 constant LCU per square kilometre, with Ecuador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Latvia?: 29 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2023.
How do Ecuador and Latvia rank globally for households and npishs final consumption expenditure (constant lcu)?: Ecuador ranks 151st and Latvia ranks 153rd of 175 countries.
Where does this data come from?: Statizoid (derived), published as Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU), 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

Ecuador vs Latvia: Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/households-and-npishs-final-consumption-expenditure-constant-lcu-per-square-kilometre/ecuador/latvia/

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/households-and-npishs-final-consumption-expenditure-constant-lcu-per-square-kilometre/ecuador/latvia/">Ecuador vs Latvia: Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator: Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU), per square kilometre
Unit: constant LCU per square kilometre
Source: Statizoid (derived)
Licence: Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage: 175 places, 6,933 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed: 14 September 2026

Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure (constant LCU) 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.