Equatorial Guinea vs Nigeria: Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, per square kilometre

Equatorial Guinea
236.18 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Nigeria
258.49 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Equatorial Guinea rank
117th
Nigeria rank
116th

Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, per square kilometre over time

  • Equatorial Guinea
  • Nigeria
0200400600196119922023

How they compare

Nigeria currently reports 258.49 units per square kilometre against 236.18 units per square kilometre in Equatorial Guinea, a difference of 22.31 units per square kilometre.

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

The two have swapped places 6 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Nigeria ahead.

Equatorial Guinea ranks 117th and Nigeria ranks 116th of 189 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Equatorial Guinea averaged higher in 1 and Nigeria in 6.

Head to head by decade

Decade Equatorial Guinea Nigeria Difference Ahead
1960s 1.98 units per square kilometre 6.24 units per square kilometre 4.26 units per square kilometre Nigeria
1970s 15.74 units per square kilometre 223.32 units per square kilometre 207.59 units per square kilometre Nigeria
1980s 2.96 units per square kilometre 108.97 units per square kilometre 106.01 units per square kilometre Nigeria
1990s 0 units per square kilometre 0.1103 units per square kilometre 0.1103 units per square kilometre Nigeria
2000s 0 units per square kilometre 0.2283 units per square kilometre 0.2283 units per square kilometre Nigeria
2010s 228.12 units per square kilometre 106.91 units per square kilometre 121.21 units per square kilometre Equatorial Guinea
2020s 242.59 units per square kilometre 265.5 units per square kilometre 22.91 units per square kilometre Nigeria

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher reserve position in the imf, us dollar, per square kilometre, Equatorial Guinea or Nigeria?
Nigeria, at 258.49 units per square kilometre against 236.18 units per square kilometre in Equatorial Guinea as of 2023.
What is the difference in reserve position in the imf, us dollar, per square kilometre between Equatorial Guinea and Nigeria?
22.31 units per square kilometre, with Nigeria ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Equatorial Guinea and Nigeria?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Equatorial Guinea and Nigeria rank globally for reserve position in the imf, us dollar, per square kilometre?
Equatorial Guinea ranks 117th and Nigeria ranks 116th of 189 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, 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 Nigeria: Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 September 2026, from https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/reserve-position-in-the-imf-us-dollar-per-square-kilometre/equatorial-guinea/nigeria/

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://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/reserve-position-in-the-imf-us-dollar-per-square-kilometre/equatorial-guinea/nigeria/">Equatorial Guinea vs Nigeria: Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar, per square kilometre
Unit
units per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
191 places, 10,792 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Reserve position in the IMF, US dollar 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.