Congo vs Zimbabwe: Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines

Congo
114.26 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Zimbabwe
117.85 kilograms per year per capita
in 2023
Congo rank
160th
Zimbabwe rank
158th

Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines over time

  • Congo
  • Zimbabwe
50100150200196119922023

How they compare

Zimbabwe currently reports 117.85 kilograms per year per capita against 114.26 kilograms per year per capita in Congo, a difference of 3.59 kilograms per year per capita.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Congo ahead.

Congo ranks 160th and Zimbabwe ranks 158th of 192 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Congo Zimbabwe Difference Ahead
1960s 122.54 kilograms per year per capita 35.73 kilograms per year per capita 86.81 kilograms per year per capita Congo
1970s 127.27 kilograms per year per capita 33.13 kilograms per year per capita 94.14 kilograms per year per capita Congo
1980s 144.47 kilograms per year per capita 34.4 kilograms per year per capita 110.08 kilograms per year per capita Congo
1990s 161.62 kilograms per year per capita 32.97 kilograms per year per capita 128.65 kilograms per year per capita Congo
2000s 160.17 kilograms per year per capita 36.67 kilograms per year per capita 123.51 kilograms per year per capita Congo
2010s 134.64 kilograms per year per capita 51.52 kilograms per year per capita 83.13 kilograms per year per capita Congo
2020s 117.97 kilograms per year per capita 110.67 kilograms per year per capita 7.3 kilograms per year per capita Congo

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines, Congo or Zimbabwe?
Zimbabwe, at 117.85 kilograms per year per capita against 114.26 kilograms per year per capita in Congo as of 2023.
What is the difference in average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines between Congo and Zimbabwe?
3.59 kilograms per year per capita, with Zimbabwe ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Congo and Zimbabwe?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Congo and Zimbabwe rank globally for average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines?
Congo ranks 160th and Zimbabwe ranks 158th of 192 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data, published as Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines. 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

Congo vs Zimbabwe: Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines. Statizoid, drawing on Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data. Retrieved 23 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/average-per-capita-fruit-intake-vs-minimum-recommended-guidelines/congo-rep/zimbabwe/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/average-per-capita-fruit-intake-vs-minimum-recommended-guidelines/congo-rep/zimbabwe/">Congo vs Zimbabwe: Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Average per capita fruit intake vs. minimum recommended guidelines
Unit
kilograms per year per capita
Source
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (2025) – processed by Our World in Data
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (Our World in Data)
Coverage
192 places, 10,214 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Quantity that is available for consumption at the end of the supply chain. It does not account for consumer waste, so the quantity that is actually consumed may be lower.