Hungary vs Panama: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square

Hungary
0.1949 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Panama
0.1676 metric tons per square kilometre
in 2023
Hungary rank
61st
Panama rank
64th

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

  • Hungary
  • Panama
00.10.20.3196119922023

How they compare

Hungary currently reports 0.1949 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.1676 metric tons per square kilometre in Panama, a difference of 0.0273 metric tons per square kilometre.

That makes Hungary's figure about 1.2 times Panama's.

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

Hungary ranks 61st and Panama ranks 64th of 215 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Hungary Panama Difference Ahead
1960s 0.1885 metric tons per square kilometre 0 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1885 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
1970s 0.2375 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0002 metric tons per square kilometre 0.2373 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
1980s 0.2349 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0296 metric tons per square kilometre 0.2052 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
1990s 0.1275 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0671 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0604 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
2000s 0.1525 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0838 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0688 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
2010s 0.1782 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1153 metric tons per square kilometre 0.063 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary
2020s 0.1994 metric tons per square kilometre 0.1177 metric tons per square kilometre 0.0818 metric tons per square kilometre Hungary

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square, Hungary or Panama?
Hungary, at 0.1949 metric tons per square kilometre against 0.1676 metric tons per square kilometre in Panama as of 2023.
What is the difference in seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square between Hungary and Panama?
0.0273 metric tons per square kilometre, with Hungary ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Hungary and Panama?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Hungary and Panama rank globally for seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square?
Hungary ranks 61st and Panama ranks 64th 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

Hungary vs Panama: Seafood production: wild fish catch vs. aquaculture, per square. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 21 September 2026, from https://reference.statizoid.com/compare/seafood-production-wild-fish-catch-vs-aquaculture-per-square-kilometre/hungary/panama/

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/hungary/panama/">Hungary vs Panama: 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.