El Salvador vs Poland: Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans
Bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans over time
- El Salvador
- Poland
How they compare
El Salvador currently reports 1.7% against 1.6% in Poland, a difference of 0.1%.
That makes El Salvador's figure about 1.1 times Poland's.
Across all 17 years both countries report, Poland has been ahead every year.
El Salvador ranks 120th and Poland ranks 122nd of 151 countries.
Poland has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | El Salvador | Poland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 3.2% | 3.5% | 0.3% | Poland |
| 2010s | 2.4% | 4.3% | 1.9% | Poland |
| 2020s | 1.7% | 2.6% | 0.9% | Poland |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans, El Salvador or Poland?
- El Salvador, at 1.7% against 1.6% in Poland as of 2024.
- What is the difference in bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans between El Salvador and Poland?
- 0.1%, with El Salvador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for El Salvador and Poland?
- 17 years are reported by both, from 2008 to 2024.
- How do El Salvador and Poland rank globally for bank nonperforming loans to total gross loans?
- El Salvador ranks 120th and Poland ranks 122nd 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.