Ecuador vs Slovakia: Ammonia, anhydrous — Import value
Ammonia, anhydrous — Import value over time
- Ecuador
- Slovakia
How they compare
Ecuador currently reports 741.52 1000 USD against 695.86 1000 USD in Slovakia, a difference of 45.66 1000 USD.
That makes Ecuador's figure about 1.1 times Slovakia's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 23 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Slovakia ahead.
Ecuador ranks 60th and Slovakia ranks 61st of 189 countries.
Slovakia has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Slovakia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 271.36 1000 USD | 9,407 1000 USD | 9,136 1000 USD | Slovakia |
| 2010s | 469.38 1000 USD | 19,906 1000 USD | 19,437 1000 USD | Slovakia |
| 2020s | 789.35 1000 USD | 3,254 1000 USD | 2,464 1000 USD | Slovakia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher ammonia, anhydrous — import value, Ecuador or Slovakia?
- Ecuador, at 741.52 1000 USD against 695.86 1000 USD in Slovakia as of 2024.
- What is the difference in ammonia, anhydrous — import value between Ecuador and Slovakia?
- 45.66 1000 USD, with Ecuador ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Slovakia?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2024.
- How do Ecuador and Slovakia rank globally for ammonia, anhydrous — import value?
- Ecuador ranks 60th and Slovakia ranks 61st of 189 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Ammonia, anhydrous — Import value. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
The Fertilizers by Product dataset contains information on the Production, Trade and Agriculture Use of inorganic (chemical or mineral) fertilizers products. The fertilizer statistics data are for a set of 23 product categories. Both straight and compound fertilizers are included. Methodological details can be found at: https://files-faostat.fao.org/production/RFB/RFB_EN_README.pdf