Nicaragua vs Serbia: Trade balance in low carbon technology products, US dollar (World)
Nicaragua
-258.40 million
in 2024
Serbia
-245.27 million
in 2024
Nicaragua rank
88th
Serbia rank
86th
Trade balance in low carbon technology products, US dollar (World) over time
- Nicaragua
- Serbia
How they compare
Serbia currently reports -245.27 million against -258.40 million in Nicaragua, a difference of 13.13 million.
The two have swapped places 7 times across 19 shared years of data; in 2006 it was Nicaragua ahead.
Nicaragua ranks 88th and Serbia ranks 86th of 187 countries.
Across the 3 decades both report, Nicaragua averaged higher in 1 and Serbia in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Nicaragua | Serbia | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | -89.95 million | -164.76 million | 74.81 million | Nicaragua |
| 2010s | -162.62 million | -91.77 million | 70.85 million | Serbia |
| 2020s | -240.65 million | -181.24 million | 59.41 million | Serbia |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher trade balance in low carbon technology products, us dollar (world), Nicaragua or Serbia?
- Serbia, at -245.27 million against -258.40 million in Nicaragua as of 2024.
- What is the difference in trade balance in low carbon technology products, us dollar (world) between Nicaragua and Serbia?
- 13.13 million, with Serbia ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Nicaragua and Serbia?
- 19 years are reported by both, from 2006 to 2024.
- How do Nicaragua and Serbia rank globally for trade balance in low carbon technology products, us dollar (world)?
- Nicaragua ranks 88th and Serbia ranks 86th of 187 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Trade balance in low carbon technology products, US dollar (World), gaps filled. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Trade balance in low carbon technology products, US dollar (World) with 118 missing years estimated by linear interpolation between the nearest real observations. Only gaps of 4 years or fewer are filled, and never beyond the first or last actual measurement — these are filled holes, not forecasts.