Equatorial Guinea vs Myanmar: GNI (current LCU), per square kilometre

Equatorial Guinea
187.74 million current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Myanmar
210.78 million current LCU per square kilometre
in 2023
Equatorial Guinea rank
36th
Myanmar rank
34th

GNI (current LCU), per square kilometre over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Myanmar
0100.0M200.0M300.0M197019962023

How they compare

Myanmar currently reports 210.78 million current LCU per square kilometre against 187.74 million current LCU per square kilometre in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 23.04 million current LCU per square kilometre.

That makes Myanmar's figure about 1.1 times Equatorial Guinea's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 52 shared years of data; in 1970 it was Equatorial Guinea ahead.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 36th and Myanmar ranks 34th of 206 countries.

Across the 6 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 5 and Myanmar in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Equatorial Guinea Myanmar Difference Ahead
1970s 198,362 current LCU per square kilometre 27,309 current LCU per square kilometre 171,053 current LCU per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
1980s 627,731 current LCU per square kilometre 93,514 current LCU per square kilometre 534,217 current LCU per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
1990s 3.82 million current LCU per square kilometre 1.18 million current LCU per square kilometre 2.64 million current LCU per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
2000s 90.60 million current LCU per square kilometre 22.05 million current LCU per square kilometre 68.55 million current LCU per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
2010s 214.81 million current LCU per square kilometre 106.38 million current LCU per square kilometre 108.43 million current LCU per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
2020s 180.03 million current LCU per square kilometre 183.19 million current LCU per square kilometre 3.15 million current LCU per square kilometre Myanmar

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher gni (current lcu), per square kilometre, Equatorial Guinea or Myanmar?
Myanmar, at 210.78 million current LCU per square kilometre against 187.74 million current LCU per square kilometre in Equatorial Guinea as of 2023.
What is the difference in gni (current lcu), per square kilometre between Equatorial Guinea and Myanmar?
23.04 million current LCU per square kilometre, with Myanmar ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Myanmar?
52 years are reported by both, from 1970 to 2023.
How do Equatorial Guinea and Myanmar rank globally for gni (current lcu), per square kilometre?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 36th and Myanmar ranks 34th of 206 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as GNI (current LCU), 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

Equatorial Guinea vs Myanmar: GNI (current LCU), per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://population.statizoid.com/compare/gni-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre-2/equatorial-guinea/myanmar/

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/gni-current-lcu-per-square-kilometre-2/equatorial-guinea/myanmar/">Equatorial Guinea vs Myanmar: GNI (current LCU), per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
GNI (current LCU), per square kilometre
Unit
current LCU per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
206 places, 9,446 data points, 1970–2023
Last refreshed

GNI (current LCU) 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.