Bangladesh vs Rwanda: IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), per square kilometre

Bangladesh
2,702 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
2,248 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Bangladesh rank
24th
Rwanda rank
26th

IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), per square kilometre over time

  • Bangladesh
  • Rwanda
01.0k2.0k3.0k197019962023

How they compare

Bangladesh currently reports 2,702 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre against 2,248 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre in Rwanda, a difference of 454 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Bangladesh's figure about 1.2 times Rwanda's.

The two have swapped places 5 times across 47 shared years of data; in 1972 it was Rwanda ahead.

Bangladesh ranks 24th and Rwanda ranks 26th of 121 countries.

Bangladesh has averaged higher in every one of the 6 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bangladesh Rwanda Difference Ahead
1970s 431.16 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 108.49 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 322.67 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh
1980s 973.27 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 52.35 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 920.92 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh
1990s 868.26 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 84.8 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 783.46 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh
2000s 300.59 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 124.72 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 175.87 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh
2010s 655.78 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 65.77 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 590.01 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh
2020s 1,665 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 1,651 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre 14.12 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre Bangladesh

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher imf repurchases and charges (tds, current us$), per square kilometre, Bangladesh or Rwanda?
Bangladesh, at 2,702 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre against 2,248 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre in Rwanda as of 2023.
What is the difference in imf repurchases and charges (tds, current us$), per square kilometre between Bangladesh and Rwanda?
454 TDS, current US$ per square kilometre, with Bangladesh ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bangladesh and Rwanda?
47 years are reported by both, from 1972 to 2023.
How do Bangladesh and Rwanda rank globally for imf repurchases and charges (tds, current us$), per square kilometre?
Bangladesh ranks 24th and Rwanda ranks 26th of 121 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), 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

Bangladesh vs Rwanda: IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 08 September 2026, from https://debt.statizoid.com/compare/imf-repurchases-and-charges-tds-current-us-per-square-kilometre/bangladesh/rwanda/

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://debt.statizoid.com/compare/imf-repurchases-and-charges-tds-current-us-per-square-kilometre/bangladesh/rwanda/">Bangladesh vs Rwanda: IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
TDS, current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
133 places, 5,507 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

IMF repurchases and charges (TDS, 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.