Australia vs Kazakhstan: Superphosphates above 35% — Export value
Superphosphates above 35% — Export value over time
- Australia
- Kazakhstan
How they compare
Australia currently reports 0.68 1000 USD against 0.57 1000 USD in Kazakhstan, a difference of 0.11 1000 USD.
That makes Australia's figure about 1.2 times Kazakhstan's.
The two have swapped places 5 times across 12 shared years of data; in 2002 it was Kazakhstan ahead.
Australia ranks 66th and Kazakhstan ranks 67th of 76 countries.
Australia has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Australia | Kazakhstan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 2,542 1000 USD | 1,846 1000 USD | 696.02 1000 USD | Australia |
| 2010s | 2,446 1000 USD | 667.08 1000 USD | 1,779 1000 USD | Australia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher superphosphates above 35% — export value, Australia or Kazakhstan?
- Australia, at 0.68 1000 USD against 0.57 1000 USD in Kazakhstan as of 2023.
- What is the difference in superphosphates above 35% — export value between Australia and Kazakhstan?
- 0.11 1000 USD, with Australia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Kazakhstan?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2002 to 2015.
- How do Australia and Kazakhstan rank globally for superphosphates above 35% — export value?
- Australia ranks 66th and Kazakhstan ranks 67th of 76 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Superphosphates above 35% — Export 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