Greece vs Sri Lanka: Armed forces personnel as a share of total population
Greece
1.4%
in 2020
Sri Lanka
1.4%
in 2020
Greece rank
11th
Sri Lanka rank
9th
Armed forces personnel as a share of total population over time
- Greece
- Sri Lanka
How they compare
Sri Lanka currently reports 1.4% against 1.4% in Greece, a difference of 0.0%.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 33 shared years of data; in 1985 it was Greece ahead.
Greece ranks 11th and Sri Lanka ranks 9th of 173 countries.
Across the 5 decades both report, Greece averaged higher in 4 and Sri Lanka in 1.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Greece | Sri Lanka | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1980s | 2.0% | 0.1% | 1.9% | Greece |
| 1990s | 1.9% | 0.9% | 1.0% | Greece |
| 2000s | 1.5% | 1.1% | 0.4% | Greece |
| 2010s | 1.4% | 1.2% | 0.1% | Greece |
| 2020s | 1.4% | 1.4% | 0.0% | Sri Lanka |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher armed forces personnel as a share of total population, Greece or Sri Lanka?
- Sri Lanka, at 1.4% against 1.4% in Greece as of 2020.
- What is the difference in armed forces personnel as a share of total population between Greece and Sri Lanka?
- 0.0%, with Sri Lanka ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Greece and Sri Lanka?
- 33 years are reported by both, from 1985 to 2020.
- How do Greece and Sri Lanka rank globally for armed forces personnel as a share of total population?
- Greece ranks 11th and Sri Lanka ranks 9th of 173 countries.
- Where does this data come from?
- The Military Balance - International Institute for Strategic Studies, via World Bank (2026); Population based on various sources (2024) – with minor processing by Our World in Data, published as Armed forces personnel as a share of total population. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.
Individual pages
About this data
Armed forces personnel are active duty military personnel, including paramilitary forces if their training, organization, equipment, and control suggest they may be used to support or replace regular military forces.