Latvia vs Malawi: Pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — Import Value
Pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — Import Value over time
- Latvia
- Malawi
How they compare
Latvia currently reports 44 1000 USD against 41 1000 USD in Malawi, a difference of 3 1000 USD.
That makes Latvia's figure about 1.1 times Malawi's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 7 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Latvia ahead.
Latvia ranks 104th and Malawi ranks 106th of 134 countries.
Latvia has averaged higher in every one of the 1 decades both report.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — import value, Latvia or Malawi?
- Latvia, at 44 1000 USD against 41 1000 USD in Malawi as of 2009.
- What is the difference in pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — import value between Latvia and Malawi?
- 3 1000 USD, with Latvia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Malawi?
- 7 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2007.
- How do Latvia and Malawi rank globally for pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — import value?
- Latvia ranks 104th and Malawi ranks 106th of 134 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, published as Pedestrian controlled tractors (single axle tractors) — Import Value. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Important notice: FAOSTAT database on Agriculture Machinery is no longer active. The latest online version of the database has as reference year 2009 (with data collected in year 2011). FAOSTAT database on Agriculture Machinery provides statistical series on Agricultural Machinery and Equipment statistical series referring to the following items: tractors, harvesters and threshers, irrigation pumps, milking machines, hand tools, and soil machines. The database includes estimates of agriculture machinery in use and value of import and export of agriculture machinery.