Australia vs Malawi: Total reserves minus gold (current US$), per square kilometre

Australia
7,359 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Malawi
6,306 current US$ per square kilometre
in 2020
Australia rank
149th
Malawi rank
152nd

Total reserves minus gold (current US$), per square kilometre over time

  • Australia
  • Malawi
02.0k4.0k6.0k8.0k196119922023

How they compare

Australia currently reports 7,359 current US$ per square kilometre against 6,306 current US$ per square kilometre in Malawi, a difference of 1,053 current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Australia's figure about 1.2 times Malawi's.

The two have swapped places 12 times across 56 shared years of data; in 1965 it was Malawi ahead.

Australia ranks 149th and Malawi ranks 152nd of 180 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Australia averaged higher in 4 and Malawi in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia Malawi Difference Ahead
1960s 155.64 current US$ per square kilometre 238.98 current US$ per square kilometre 83.35 current US$ per square kilometre Malawi
1970s 404.23 current US$ per square kilometre 599.56 current US$ per square kilometre 195.32 current US$ per square kilometre Malawi
1980s 979.81 current US$ per square kilometre 614.52 current US$ per square kilometre 365.28 current US$ per square kilometre Australia
1990s 1,894 current US$ per square kilometre 1,490 current US$ per square kilometre 403.82 current US$ per square kilometre Australia
2000s 4,095 current US$ per square kilometre 1,865 current US$ per square kilometre 2,230 current US$ per square kilometre Australia
2010s 6,358 current US$ per square kilometre 5,744 current US$ per square kilometre 613.98 current US$ per square kilometre Australia
2020s 5,090 current US$ per square kilometre 6,306 current US$ per square kilometre 1,216 current US$ per square kilometre Malawi

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher total reserves minus gold (current us$), per square kilometre, Australia or Malawi?
Australia, at 7,359 current US$ per square kilometre against 6,306 current US$ per square kilometre in Malawi as of 2023.
What is the difference in total reserves minus gold (current us$), per square kilometre between Australia and Malawi?
1,053 current US$ per square kilometre, with Australia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Malawi?
56 years are reported by both, from 1965 to 2020.
How do Australia and Malawi rank globally for total reserves minus gold (current us$), per square kilometre?
Australia ranks 149th and Malawi ranks 152nd of 180 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Total reserves minus gold (current US$), 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

Australia vs Malawi: Total reserves minus gold (current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 10 September 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/total-reserves-minus-gold-current-us-per-square-kilometre/australia/malawi/

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/total-reserves-minus-gold-current-us-per-square-kilometre/australia/malawi/">Australia vs Malawi: Total reserves minus gold (current US$), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Total reserves minus gold (current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
181 places, 8,952 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Total reserves minus gold (current 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.