Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) vs Rwanda: Population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre

Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC)
0.7 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Rwanda
9.02 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) rank
39th
Rwanda rank
40th

Population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre over time

  • Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC)
  • Rwanda
0246810196119922023

How they compare

Rwanda currently reports 9.02 units per square kilometre against 0.7 units per square kilometre in Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC), a difference of 8.32 units per square kilometre.

That makes Rwanda's figure about 12.9 times Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC)'s.

Across all 63 years both countries report, Rwanda has been ahead every year.

Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) ranks 39th and Rwanda ranks 40th of 43 groups.

Rwanda has averaged higher in every one of the 7 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) Rwanda Difference Ahead
1960s 0.1813 units per square kilometre 1.83 units per square kilometre 1.65 units per square kilometre Rwanda
1970s 0.2263 units per square kilometre 2.4 units per square kilometre 2.17 units per square kilometre Rwanda
1980s 0.2749 units per square kilometre 3.06 units per square kilometre 2.78 units per square kilometre Rwanda
1990s 0.3268 units per square kilometre 2.78 units per square kilometre 2.45 units per square kilometre Rwanda
2000s 0.4247 units per square kilometre 5.11 units per square kilometre 4.69 units per square kilometre Rwanda
2010s 0.5398 units per square kilometre 7.47 units per square kilometre 6.93 units per square kilometre Rwanda
2020s 0.6667 units per square kilometre 8.59 units per square kilometre 7.92 units per square kilometre Rwanda

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre, Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) or Rwanda?
Rwanda, at 9.02 units per square kilometre against 0.7 units per square kilometre in Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) as of 2023.
What is the difference in population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre between Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) and Rwanda?
8.32 units per square kilometre, with Rwanda ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) and Rwanda?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) and Rwanda rank globally for population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre?
Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) ranks 39th and Rwanda ranks 40th of 43 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Population ages 50-54, female, 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

Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) vs Rwanda: Population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 10 September 2026, from https://health.statizoid.com/compare/population-ages-50-54-female-per-square-kilometre/heavily-indebted-poor-countries-hipc/rwanda/

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://health.statizoid.com/compare/population-ages-50-54-female-per-square-kilometre/heavily-indebted-poor-countries-hipc/rwanda/">Heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) vs Rwanda: Population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Population ages 50-54, female, per square kilometre
Unit
units per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
260 places, 15,090 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Population ages 50-54, female 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.