Libya vs Viet Nam: Gross fixed capital formation, General government, Constant prices
Libya
48.73
in 2008
Viet Nam
42.81
in 2019
Libya rank
23rd
Viet Nam rank
26th
Gross fixed capital formation, General government, Constant prices over time
- Libya
- Viet Nam
How they compare
Libya currently reports 48.73 against 42.81 in Viet Nam, a difference of 5.92.
That makes Libya's figure about 1.1 times Viet Nam's.
Across all 49 years both countries report, Libya has been ahead every year.
Libya ranks 23rd and Viet Nam ranks 26th of 173 countries.
Libya has averaged higher in every one of the 5 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Libya | Viet Nam | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1960s | 28.17 | 0.3446 | 27.83 | Libya |
| 1970s | 48.41 | 0.503 | 47.91 | Libya |
| 1980s | 44.67 | 0.8104 | 43.86 | Libya |
| 1990s | 31.68 | 3.33 | 28.36 | Libya |
| 2000s | 41.75 | 11.07 | 30.68 | Libya |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher gross fixed capital formation, general government, constant prices, Libya or Viet Nam?
- Libya, at 48.73 against 42.81 in Viet Nam as of 2008.
- What is the difference in gross fixed capital formation, general government, constant prices between Libya and Viet Nam?
- 5.92, with Libya ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Libya and Viet Nam?
- 49 years are reported by both, from 1960 to 2008.
- How do Libya and Viet Nam rank globally for gross fixed capital formation, general government, constant prices?
- Libya ranks 23rd and Viet Nam ranks 26th of 173 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- International Monetary Fund, published as Gross fixed capital formation, General government, Constant prices, Purchasing power parity (PPP) international dollar, ICP benchmark 2017. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
This dataset provides comprehensive data for investment and capital stock for the general government, private sector and public-private partnerships, across the Fund member countries.