Luxembourg vs Mozambique: Ammonia, anhydrous — Import value
Ammonia, anhydrous — Import value over time
- Luxembourg
- Mozambique
How they compare
Luxembourg currently reports 37.22 1000 USD against 35.66 1000 USD in Mozambique, a difference of 1.56 1000 USD.
The two have swapped places 4 times across 23 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Luxembourg ahead.
Luxembourg ranks 126th and Mozambique ranks 129th of 189 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Luxembourg averaged higher in 2 and Mozambique in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Luxembourg | Mozambique | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 112.85 1000 USD | 374.99 1000 USD | 262.15 1000 USD | Mozambique |
| 2010s | 40.8 1000 USD | 15.29 1000 USD | 25.5 1000 USD | Luxembourg |
| 2020s | 32.4 1000 USD | 27.05 1000 USD | 5.35 1000 USD | Luxembourg |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher ammonia, anhydrous — import value, Luxembourg or Mozambique?
- Luxembourg, at 37.22 1000 USD against 35.66 1000 USD in Mozambique as of 2024.
- What is the difference in ammonia, anhydrous — import value between Luxembourg and Mozambique?
- 1.56 1000 USD, with Luxembourg ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Luxembourg and Mozambique?
- 23 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2024.
- How do Luxembourg and Mozambique rank globally for ammonia, anhydrous — import value?
- Luxembourg ranks 126th and Mozambique ranks 129th 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