Latvia vs Luxembourg: Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per
Latvia
0.0014 t per person
in 2017
Luxembourg
0.0014 t per person
in 2017
Latvia rank
52nd
Luxembourg rank
51st
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per over time
- Latvia
- Luxembourg
How they compare
Luxembourg currently reports 0.0014 t per person against 0.0014 t per person in Latvia, a difference of 0 t per person.
The two have swapped places 2 times across 18 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Luxembourg ahead.
Latvia ranks 52nd and Luxembourg ranks 51st of 167 countries.
Luxembourg has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Latvia | Luxembourg | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2000s | 0.0014 t per person | 0.0019 t per person | 0.0005 t per person | Luxembourg |
| 2010s | 0.0013 t per person | 0.0015 t per person | 0.0001 t per person | Luxembourg |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per, Latvia or Luxembourg?
- Luxembourg, at 0.0014 t per person against 0.0014 t per person in Latvia as of 2017.
- What is the difference in edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per between Latvia and Luxembourg?
- 0 t per person, with Luxembourg ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Latvia and Luxembourg?
- 18 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2017.
- How do Latvia and Luxembourg rank globally for edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — production, per?
- Latvia ranks 52nd and Luxembourg ranks 51st of 167 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- Statizoid (derived), published as Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production, per capita. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Edible offal of cattle, fresh, chilled or frozen — Production divided by Population, total, matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.