Romania vs Sweden: Provisions to nonperforming loans
Provisions to nonperforming loans over time
- Romania
- Sweden
How they compare
Romania currently reports 63.3% against 63.0% in Sweden, a difference of 0.3%.
The two have swapped places 3 times across 14 shared years of data; in 2003 it was Sweden ahead.
Romania ranks 63rd and Sweden ranks 65th of 140 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Romania averaged higher in 2 and Sweden in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Romania | Sweden | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 48.9% | 60.1% | 11.2% | Sweden |
| 2010s | 60.1% | 44.1% | 16.1% | Romania |
| 2020s | 63.3% | 63.0% | 0.3% | Romania |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher provisions to nonperforming loans, Romania or Sweden?
- Romania, at 63.3% against 63.0% in Sweden as of 2020.
- What is the difference in provisions to nonperforming loans between Romania and Sweden?
- 0.3%, with Romania ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Romania and Sweden?
- 14 years are reported by both, from 2003 to 2020.
- How do Romania and Sweden rank globally for provisions to nonperforming loans?
- Romania ranks 63rd and Sweden ranks 65th 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.