Bermuda vs Sao Tome and Principe: Capture fishery production, per square kilometre

Bermuda
6.26 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2024
Sao Tome and Principe
5.97 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2024
Bermuda rank
28th
Sao Tome and Principe rank
30th

Capture fishery production, per square kilometre over time

  • Bermuda
  • Sao Tome and Principe
050100150196119922024

How they compare

Bermuda currently reports 6.26 metric tons per square kilometre against 5.97 metric tons per square kilometre in Sao Tome and Principe, a difference of 0.29 metric tons per square kilometre.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 64 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Bermuda ahead.

Bermuda ranks 28th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 30th of 215 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Bermuda averaged higher in 6 and Sao Tome and Principe in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Bermuda Sao Tome and Principe Difference Ahead
1960s 8.85 metric tons per square kilometre 0.787 metric tons per square kilometre 8.06 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda
1970s 87.79 metric tons per square kilometre 0.9196 metric tons per square kilometre 86.87 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda
1980s 25.56 metric tons per square kilometre 3.31 metric tons per square kilometre 22.25 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda
1990s 8.18 metric tons per square kilometre 3.7 metric tons per square kilometre 4.48 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda
2000s 6.98 metric tons per square kilometre 4.33 metric tons per square kilometre 2.65 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda
2010s 7.73 metric tons per square kilometre 8.55 metric tons per square kilometre 0.8235 metric tons per square kilometre Sao Tome and Principe
2020s 6.77 metric tons per square kilometre 5.81 metric tons per square kilometre 0.9642 metric tons per square kilometre Bermuda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher capture fishery production, per square kilometre, Bermuda or Sao Tome and Principe?
Bermuda, at 6.26 metric tons per square kilometre against 5.97 metric tons per square kilometre in Sao Tome and Principe as of 2024.
What is the difference in capture fishery production, per square kilometre between Bermuda and Sao Tome and Principe?
0.29 metric tons per square kilometre, with Bermuda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Bermuda and Sao Tome and Principe?
64 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2024.
How do Bermuda and Sao Tome and Principe rank globally for capture fishery production, per square kilometre?
Bermuda ranks 28th and Sao Tome and Principe ranks 30th of 215 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Capture fishery production, per square kilometre. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Bermuda vs Sao Tome and Principe: Capture fishery production, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 November 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/capture-fishery-production-per-square-kilometre/bermuda/sao-tome-and-principe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/capture-fishery-production-per-square-kilometre/bermuda/sao-tome-and-principe/">Bermuda vs Sao Tome and Principe: Capture fishery production, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Capture fishery production, per square kilometre
Unit
metric tons per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
215 places, 12,459 data points, 1961–2024
Last refreshed

Capture fishery production divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.