Barbados vs Ethiopia: Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans over time
- Barbados
- Ethiopia
How they compare
Barbados currently reports 5.8% against 5.4% in Ethiopia, a difference of 0.4%.
That makes Barbados's figure about 1.1 times Ethiopia's.
Across all 5 years both countries report, Barbados has been ahead every year.
Barbados ranks 37th and Ethiopia ranks 40th of 151 countries.
Barbados has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Barbados | Ethiopia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 6.1% | 3.2% | 2.9% | Barbados |
| 2020s | 7.0% | 4.4% | 2.6% | Barbados |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans, Barbados or Ethiopia?
- Barbados, at 5.8% against 5.4% in Ethiopia as of 2022.
- What is the difference in bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans between Barbados and Ethiopia?
- 0.4%, with Barbados ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Barbados and Ethiopia?
- 5 years are reported by both, from 2017 to 2021.
- How do Barbados and Ethiopia rank globally for bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans?
- Barbados ranks 37th and Ethiopia ranks 40th of 151 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Financial Soundness Indicators, International Monetary Fund (IMF), published as Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The indicator measures the proportion of a deposit taker’s loan portfolio that is impaired or at risk of default. It is calculated as the ratio of non-performing loans (NPLs) to total gross loans, where NPLs are defined as loans that are past due by 90 days or more or are otherwise considered unlikely to be repaid in full without the realization of collateral. Both non-performing loans and total gross loans should be reported at their gross book value, without deducting for loan-loss provisions or collateral. This indicator provides a key measure of asset quality and potential credit risk in the banking system.