Barbados vs Sub-Saharan Africa: IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, per square kilometre

Barbados
1.37 million units per square kilometre
in 2023
Sub-Saharan Africa
1,559 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Barbados rank
2nd
Sub-Saharan Africa rank
2nd

IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, per square kilometre over time

  • Barbados
  • Sub-Saharan Africa
0500.0k1.0M1.5M196119922023

How they compare

Barbados currently reports 1.37 million units per square kilometre against 1,559 units per square kilometre in Sub-Saharan Africa, a difference of 1.36 million units per square kilometre.

That makes Barbados's figure about 876.0 times Sub-Saharan Africa's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Sub-Saharan Africa ahead.

Barbados ranks 2nd and Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 2nd of 189 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Barbados averaged higher in 6 and Sub-Saharan Africa in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Barbados Sub-Saharan Africa Difference Ahead
1960s 0 units per square kilometre 20.92 units per square kilometre 20.92 units per square kilometre Sub-Saharan Africa
1970s 34,167 units per square kilometre 108.51 units per square kilometre 34,058 units per square kilometre Barbados
1980s 134,900 units per square kilometre 455.1 units per square kilometre 134,445 units per square kilometre Barbados
1990s 201,414 units per square kilometre 524.41 units per square kilometre 200,889 units per square kilometre Barbados
2000s 211,155 units per square kilometre 639.21 units per square kilometre 210,516 units per square kilometre Barbados
2010s 279,708 units per square kilometre 753.39 units per square kilometre 278,954 units per square kilometre Barbados
2020s 1.28 million units per square kilometre 1,554 units per square kilometre 1.27 million units per square kilometre Barbados

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher imf holdings of currency, us dollar, per square kilometre, Barbados or Sub-Saharan Africa?
Barbados, at 1.37 million units per square kilometre against 1,559 units per square kilometre in Sub-Saharan Africa as of 2023.
What is the difference in imf holdings of currency, us dollar, per square kilometre between Barbados and Sub-Saharan Africa?
1.36 million units per square kilometre, with Barbados ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Barbados and Sub-Saharan Africa?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Barbados and Sub-Saharan Africa rank globally for imf holdings of currency, us dollar, per square kilometre?
Barbados ranks 2nd and Sub-Saharan Africa ranks 2nd of 189 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, 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

Barbados vs Sub-Saharan Africa: IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 October 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/imf-holdings-of-currency-us-dollar-per-square-kilometre/barbados/sub-saharan-africa/

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/imf-holdings-of-currency-us-dollar-per-square-kilometre/barbados/sub-saharan-africa/">Barbados vs Sub-Saharan Africa: IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
IMF holdings of currency, US dollar, per square kilometre
Unit
units per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
191 places, 10,792 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

IMF holdings of currency, US dollar 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.