Croatia vs Lithuania: Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure per capita growth
Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure per capita growth over time
- Croatia
- Lithuania
How they compare
Croatia currently reports 2.3% against 2.1% in Lithuania, a difference of 0.2%.
That makes Croatia's figure about 1.1 times Lithuania's.
The two have swapped places 9 times across 30 shared years of data; in 1996 it was Lithuania ahead.
Croatia ranks 88th and Lithuania ranks 91st of 172 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Croatia averaged higher in 1 and Lithuania in 3.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Croatia | Lithuania | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 3.0% | 6.0% | 3.1% | Lithuania |
| 2000s | 3.9% | 7.0% | 3.1% | Lithuania |
| 2010s | 1.6% | 4.0% | 2.4% | Lithuania |
| 2020s | 4.4% | 1.5% | 2.9% | Croatia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher households and npishs final consumption expenditure per capita growth, Croatia or Lithuania?
- Croatia, at 2.3% against 2.1% in Lithuania as of 2025.
- What is the difference in households and npishs final consumption expenditure per capita growth between Croatia and Lithuania?
- 0.2%, with Croatia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Croatia and Lithuania?
- 30 years are reported by both, from 1996 to 2025.
- How do Croatia and Lithuania rank globally for households and npishs final consumption expenditure per capita growth?
- Croatia ranks 88th and Lithuania ranks 91st of 172 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Country official statistics, National Statistical Offices (NSOs), published as Households and NPISHs Final consumption expenditure per capita growth (annual %). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
This field includes expenditure on goods and services by the Household and NPISH sector for the direct satisfaction of human needs or wants, whether individual or collective. The core indicator has been divided by the general population to achieve a per capita estimate.This indicator denotes the percentage change over each previous year of the constant price (base year 2015) series in United States dollars.