Guatemala vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)

Guatemala
0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP
in 2024
Saint Kitts and Nevis
0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP
in 2005
Guatemala rank
9th
Saint Kitts and Nevis rank
11th

Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016) over time

  • Guatemala
  • Saint Kitts and Nevis
00.0010.0010.002196119922024

How they compare

Guatemala currently reports 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP against 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP in Saint Kitts and Nevis, a difference of 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP.

That makes Guatemala's figure about 1.1 times Saint Kitts and Nevis's.

The two have swapped places 3 times across 45 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Saint Kitts and Nevis ahead.

Guatemala ranks 9th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 11th of 131 countries.

Across the 5 decades both report, Guatemala averaged higher in 2 and Saint Kitts and Nevis in 3.

Head to head by decade

Decade Guatemala Saint Kitts and Nevis Difference Ahead
1960s 0.0001 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0011 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0011 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP Saint Kitts and Nevis
1970s 0.0001 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0005 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0004 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP Saint Kitts and Nevis
1980s 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0001 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0.0001 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP Saint Kitts and Nevis
1990s 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP Guatemala
2000s 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP Guatemala

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016), Guatemala or Saint Kitts and Nevis?
Guatemala, at 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP against 0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP in Saint Kitts and Nevis as of 2024.
What is the difference in sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016) between Guatemala and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
0 1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP, with Guatemala ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and Saint Kitts and Nevis?
45 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2005.
How do Guatemala and Saint Kitts and Nevis rank globally for sugar crops primary — gross production value (constant 2014-2016)?
Guatemala ranks 9th and Saint Kitts and Nevis ranks 11th of 131 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per unit of GDP. 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

Guatemala vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016). Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 05 October 2026, from https://agriculture.statizoid.com/compare/sugar-crops-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-unit-of-gdp/guatemala/st-kitts-and-nevis/

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/sugar-crops-primary-gross-production-value-constant-2014-2016-thousand-i-per-unit-of-gdp/guatemala/st-kitts-and-nevis/">Guatemala vs Saint Kitts and Nevis: Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$), per unit of GDP
Unit
1000 Int$ per US$ of GDP
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
132 places, 6,651 data points, 1961–2024
Last refreshed

Sugar Crops Primary — Gross Production Value (constant 2014-2016 thousand I$) divided by GDP (current US$), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.