IDA total vs Rwanda: Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), per square kilometre

IDA total
603.53 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
21,978 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
IDA total rank
2nd
Rwanda rank
5th

Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), per square kilometre over time

  • IDA total
  • Rwanda
05.0k10.0k15.0k20.0k197019962023

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 21,978 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre against 603.53 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre in IDA total, a difference of 21,374 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre.

That makes Rwanda's figure about 36.4 times IDA total's.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was IDA total ahead.

IDA total ranks 2nd and Rwanda ranks 5th of 37 groups.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade IDA total Rwanda Difference Ahead
1970s 17.68 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 194.11 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 176.43 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 77.92 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 962.57 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 884.65 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 140.61 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 1,559 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 1,419 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2000s 168.95 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 1,712 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 1,543 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2010s 265.16 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 6,957 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 6,692 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 503.68 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 14,786 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre 14,283 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher net financial flows, ida (nfl, current us$), per square kilometre, IDA total or Rwanda?
Rwanda, at 21,978 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre against 603.53 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre in IDA total as of 2023.
What is the difference in net financial flows, ida (nfl, current us$), per square kilometre between IDA total and Rwanda?
21,374 NFL, current US$ per square kilometre, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for IDA total and Rwanda?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do IDA total and Rwanda rank globally for net financial flows, ida (nfl, current us$), per square kilometre?
IDA total ranks 2nd and Rwanda ranks 5th of 37 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), 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

IDA total vs Rwanda: Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 August 2026, from https://debt.statizoid.com/compare/net-financial-flows-ida-nfl-current-us-per-square-kilometre/ida-total/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/net-financial-flows-ida-nfl-current-us-per-square-kilometre/ida-total/rwanda/">IDA total vs Rwanda: Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, current US$), per square kilometre
Unit
NFL, current US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
151 places, 6,729 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

Net financial flows, IDA (NFL, 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.