Botswana vs Sri Lanka: Provisions to nonperforming loans
Provisions to nonperforming loans over time
- Botswana
- Sri Lanka
How they compare
Sri Lanka currently reports 61.3% against 60.2% in Botswana, a difference of 1.1%.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 9 shared years of data; in 2012 it was Botswana ahead.
Botswana ranks 69th and Sri Lanka ranks 68th of 140 countries.
Across the 2 decades both report, Botswana averaged higher in 1 and Sri Lanka in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Botswana | Sri Lanka | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 57.6% | 57.2% | 0.4% | Botswana |
| 2020s | 60.2% | 61.3% | 1.1% | Sri Lanka |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher provisions to nonperforming loans, Botswana or Sri Lanka?
- Sri Lanka, at 61.3% against 60.2% in Botswana as of 2020.
- What is the difference in provisions to nonperforming loans between Botswana and Sri Lanka?
- 1.1%, with Sri Lanka ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Botswana and Sri Lanka?
- 9 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2020.
- How do Botswana and Sri Lanka rank globally for provisions to nonperforming loans?
- Botswana ranks 69th and Sri Lanka ranks 68th of 140 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Financial Soundness Indicators Database (fsi.imf.org), International Monetary Fund (IMF), published as Provisions to nonperforming loans (%). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Provisions to nonperforming loans. Nonperforming Loans are loans for which the contractual payments are delinquent, usually defined as and NPL ratio being overdue for more than a certain number of days (e.g., usually more than 90 days). Reported by IMF staff. Note that due to differences in national accounting, taxation, and supervisory regimes, these data are not strictly comparable across countries.