Guatemala vs New Zealand: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square

Guatemala
0.3965 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
New Zealand
0.4145 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Guatemala rank
45th
New Zealand rank
44th

Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square over time

  • Guatemala
  • New Zealand
00.10.20.30.40.5196119922023

How they compare

New Zealand currently reports 0.4145 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.3965 metric tons per square kilometre in Guatemala, a difference of 0.018 metric tons per square kilometre.

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

Guatemala ranks 45th and New Zealand ranks 44th of 215 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Guatemala New Zealand Difference Ahead
1960s 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0072 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0072 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
1970s 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0084 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0084 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
1980s 0.0031 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0518 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0486 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
1990s 0.0281 metric tons per square kilometre 0.2431 metric tons per square kilometre 0.215 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
2000s 0.0983 metric tons per square kilometre 0.3673 metric tons per square kilometre 0.269 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
2010s 0.2189 metric tons per square kilometre 0.4067 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1879 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand
2020s 0.3524 metric tons per square kilometre 0.4279 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0756 metric tons per square kilometre New Zealand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square, Guatemala or New Zealand?
New Zealand, at 0.4145 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.3965 metric tons per square kilometre in Guatemala as of 2023.
What is the difference in seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square between Guatemala and New Zealand?
0.018 metric tons per square kilometre, with New Zealand ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Guatemala and New Zealand?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Guatemala and New Zealand rank globally for seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square?
Guatemala ranks 45th and New Zealand ranks 44th of 215 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, 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

Guatemala vs New Zealand: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 22 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/guatemala/new-zealand/

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://reference.statizoid.com/compare/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/guatemala/new-zealand/">Guatemala vs New Zealand: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square kilometre
Unit
metric tons per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
215 places, 12,245 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture 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.