Korea vs Latvia: NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type

Korea
30.03 Percentage of GDP
in 2024
Latvia
23.47 Percentage of GDP
in 2025
Korea rank
1st
Latvia rank
3rd

NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type over time

  • Korea
  • Latvia
010203040197019972025

How they compare

Korea currently reports 30.03 Percentage of GDP against 23.47 Percentage of GDP in Latvia, a difference of 6.56 Percentage of GDP.

That makes Korea's figure about 1.3 times Latvia's.

The two have swapped places 2 times across 30 shared years of data; in 1995 it was Korea ahead.

Korea ranks 1st and Latvia ranks 3rd of 2 groups.

Korea has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Korea Latvia Difference Ahead
1990s 33.65 Percentage of GDP 19.37 Percentage of GDP 14.28 Percentage of GDP Korea
2000s 30.7 Percentage of GDP 29.33 Percentage of GDP 1.37 Percentage of GDP Korea
2010s 30.07 Percentage of GDP 22.85 Percentage of GDP 7.22 Percentage of GDP Korea
2020s 31.19 Percentage of GDP 23.1 Percentage of GDP 8.08 Percentage of GDP Korea

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher naag chapter 3b: gross fixed capital formation by asset type, Korea or Latvia?
Korea, at 30.03 Percentage of GDP against 23.47 Percentage of GDP in Latvia as of 2024.
What is the difference in naag chapter 3b: gross fixed capital formation by asset type between Korea and Latvia?
6.56 Percentage of GDP, with Korea ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Korea and Latvia?
30 years are reported by both, from 1995 to 2024.
How do Korea and Latvia rank globally for naag chapter 3b: gross fixed capital formation by asset type?
Korea ranks 1st and Latvia ranks 3rd of 2 groups.
Where does this data come from?
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, published as NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type. 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

Korea vs Latvia: NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type. Statizoid, drawing on Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Retrieved 15 November 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/naag-chapter-3b-gross-fixed-capital-formation-by-asset-type/korea/latvia-2/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/naag-chapter-3b-gross-fixed-capital-formation-by-asset-type/korea/latvia-2/">Korea vs Latvia: NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
NAAG Chapter 3B: Gross fixed capital formation by asset type
Unit
Percentage of GDP
Source
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development
Licence
OECD Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
47 places, 2,254 data points, 1970–2025
Last refreshed

The National Accounts at a Glance (NAAG) is based on the original publication and has nine chapters: The first chapter focuses on indicators of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The second is about income and related indicators and presents measures of net national income, savings and net lending/net borrowing. The third chapter looks at the expenditure approach to GDP, with information on the key components of demand and imports. The fourth chapter presents indicators from a production perspective. The fifth chapter looks at household sector indicators such as household disposable income, saving and net worth. The sixth chapter focuses on general government, presenting indicators such as general government revenue, expenditure and gross debt. The seventh chapter looks at financial and non-financial corporations. The eighth chapter presents indicators of capital stock and depreciation. Finally, chapter 9 provides reference indicators, important in their own right but also because they are used in the construction of many of the indicators presented elsewhere in NAAG.