Congo vs Viet Nam: Superphosphates above 35% — Import value
Superphosphates above 35% — Import value over time
- Congo
- Viet Nam
How they compare
Viet Nam currently reports 444.69 1000 USD against 357.25 1000 USD in Congo, a difference of 87.44 1000 USD.
That makes Viet Nam's figure about 1.2 times Congo's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 13 shared years of data; in 2007 it was Viet Nam ahead.
Congo ranks 63rd and Viet Nam ranks 60th of 173 countries.
Viet Nam has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Congo | Viet Nam | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 119.76 1000 USD | 2,024 1000 USD | 1,904 1000 USD | Viet Nam |
| 2010s | 31.91 1000 USD | 1,252 1000 USD | 1,220 1000 USD | Viet Nam |
| 2020s | 62.22 1000 USD | 196.58 1000 USD | 134.36 1000 USD | Viet Nam |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher superphosphates above 35% — import value, Congo or Viet Nam?
- Viet Nam, at 444.69 1000 USD against 357.25 1000 USD in Congo as of 2023.
- What is the difference in superphosphates above 35% — import value between Congo and Viet Nam?
- 87.44 1000 USD, with Viet Nam ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Viet Nam?
- 13 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2023.
- How do Congo and Viet Nam rank globally for superphosphates above 35% — import value?
- Congo ranks 63rd and Viet Nam ranks 60th of 173 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Superphosphates above 35% — 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