Cuba vs New Zealand: GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), per square kilometre

Cuba
789,170 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
New Zealand
840,762 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre
in 2023
Cuba rank
89th
New Zealand rank
86th

GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), per square kilometre over time

  • Cuba
  • New Zealand
200.0k400.0k600.0k800.0k197019962023

How they compare

New Zealand currently reports 840,762 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre against 789,170 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba, a difference of 51,592 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre.

That makes New Zealand's figure about 1.1 times Cuba's.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 54 shared years of data; in 1970 it was New Zealand ahead.

Cuba ranks 89th and New Zealand ranks 86th of 207 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Cuba averaged higher in 5 and New Zealand in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Cuba New Zealand Difference Ahead
1970s 278,860 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 260,414 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 18,446 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1980s 457,960 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 313,031 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 144,929 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
1990s 384,568 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 379,190 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 5,378 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2000s 547,787 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 531,375 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 16,412 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2010s 808,358 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 670,505 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 137,854 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre Cuba
2020s 791,350 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 809,395 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre 18,045 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre New Zealand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gdp at market prices (constant 2010 us$), per square kilometre, Cuba or New Zealand?
New Zealand, at 840,762 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre against 789,170 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre in Cuba as of 2023.
What is the difference in gdp at market prices (constant 2010 us$), per square kilometre between Cuba and New Zealand?
51,592 constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre, with New Zealand ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Cuba and New Zealand?
54 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Cuba and New Zealand rank globally for gdp at market prices (constant 2010 us$), per square kilometre?
Cuba ranks 89th and New Zealand ranks 86th of 207 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), 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

Cuba vs New Zealand: GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://population.statizoid.com/compare/gdp-at-market-prices-constant-2010-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/new-zealand/

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://population.statizoid.com/compare/gdp-at-market-prices-constant-2010-us-per-square-kilometre/cuba/new-zealand/">Cuba vs New Zealand: GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
GDP at market prices (constant 2010 US$), per square kilometre
Unit
constant 2010 US$ per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
207 places, 9,607 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

GDP at market prices (constant 2010 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.