Eswatini vs South Sudan: Merchandise imports from high-income economies
Merchandise imports from high-income economies over time
- Eswatini
- South Sudan
How they compare
South Sudan currently reports 14.2% against 10.8% in Eswatini, a difference of 3.4%.
That makes South Sudan's figure about 1.3 times Eswatini's.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 12 shared years of data; in 2012 it was South Sudan ahead.
Eswatini ranks 201st and South Sudan ranks 198th of 206 countries.
South Sudan has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Eswatini | South Sudan | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2010s | 8.9% | 23.8% | 14.9% | South Sudan |
| 2020s | 11.3% | 14.0% | 2.7% | South Sudan |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher merchandise imports from high-income economies, Eswatini or South Sudan?
- South Sudan, at 14.2% against 10.8% in Eswatini as of 2023.
- What is the difference in merchandise imports from high-income economies between Eswatini and South Sudan?
- 3.4%, with South Sudan ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Eswatini and South Sudan?
- 12 years are reported by both, from 2012 to 2023.
- How do Eswatini and South Sudan rank globally for merchandise imports from high-income economies?
- Eswatini ranks 201st and South Sudan ranks 198th of 206 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Staff estimates, World Bank (WB), published as Merchandise imports from high-income economies (% of total merchandise imports). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Merchandise imports from high-income economies are the sum of merchandise imports by the reporting economy from high-income economies according to the World Bank classification of economies. Data are expressed as a percentage of total merchandise imports by the economy. Data are computed only if at least half of the economies in the partner country group had non-missing data.