Tuvalu has a population density of 806 people per square mile compared to 682 people in Uganda. Tuvalu has 28,054 sq ft of land per person vs 51,875 sq ft in Uganda. Tuvalu and Uganda rank 32nd and 42nd by population density, respectively.
Population density is calculated as the ratio of population to land area. Tuvalu has 0.0001% of the world's population and 0.00002% of all countries' land area, compared to 0.62% of the population and 0.13% of the land area for Uganda, making the population density in Tuvalu 18.3% higher than in Uganda.
Population density by year
people per square mile
| Year | Population density | |
|---|---|---|
Tuvalu
|
Uganda
|
|
| 2026 | 806 | 682 |
| 2025 | 819 | 664 |
| 2024 | 833 | 646 |
| 2023 | 847 | 628 |
| 2022 | 863 | 611 |
| 2021 | 880 | 593 |
| 2020 | 898 | 574 |
| 2019 | 913 | 555 |
| 2018 | 928 | 537 |
| 2017 | 938 | 519 |
| 2016 | 944 | 501 |
| 2015 | 946 | 485 |
| 2014 | 948 | 470 |
| 2013 | 950 | 456 |
| 2012 | 944 | 444 |
| 2011 | 931 | 431 |
| 2010 | 916 | 418 |
| 2009 | 903 | 408 |
| 2008 | 891 | 396 |
| 2007 | 879 | 384 |
| 2006 | 868 | 373 |
| 2005 | 858 | 362 |
| 2004 | 847 | 352 |
| 2003 | 837 | 342 |
| 2002 | 831 | 331 |
| 2001 | 828 | 321 |
| 2000 | 824 | 311 |
| 1999 | 820 | 301 |
| 1998 | 816 | 291.9 |
| 1997 | 812 | 283.3 |
| 1996 | 807 | 275.2 |
| 1995 | 801 | 267.9 |
| 1994 | 795 | 260.7 |
| 1993 | 788 | 252.1 |
| 1992 | 780 | 243.5 |
| 1991 | 771 | 235.3 |
| 1990 | 760 | 227.7 |
| 1989 | 748 | 220.5 |
| 1988 | 735 | 213.5 |
| 1987 | 723 | 206.8 |
| 1986 | 709 | 200.5 |
| 1985 | 695 | 194.7 |
| 1984 | 682 | 189.3 |
| 1983 | 672 | 184.3 |
| 1982 | 662 | 179.8 |
| 1981 | 650 | 175.7 |
| 1980 | 636 | 172.1 |
| 1979 | 620 | 168.5 |
| 1978 | 601 | 164.5 |
| 1977 | 577 | 160.2 |
| 1976 | 553 | 156 |
| 1975 | 528 | 152 |
| 1974 | 503 | 148.1 |
| 1973 | 490 | 144.5 |
| 1972 | 491 | 141.1 |
| 1971 | 491 | 137.6 |
| 1970 | 489 | 133.8 |
| 1969 | 486 | 129.8 |
| 1968 | 486 | 125.8 |
| 1967 | 488 | 122 |
| 1966 | 491 | 118.3 |
| 1965 | 493 | 114.7 |
| 1964 | 497 | 111.3 |
| 1963 | 497 | 108 |
| 1962 | 492 | 104.9 |
| 1961 | 488 | 101.9 |
Data sources: World Bank | Agriculture & Rural Development (1961–2026, retrieved 2026-04-06); United Nations | World Population Prospects (2025–2026, retrieved 2026-03-10).
GeoRank.org/population-density/tuvalu/uganda | CC BY 
From 2006 to 2026, population density in Tuvalu decreased by 7.1%, compared to a 82.7% growth in Uganda.
In 2006, Tuvalu ranked 21st by population density and is 32nd now. Uganda was 55th in 2006 and ranks 42nd out of 197 currently.
Population density comparison
|
Tuvalu
|
Uganda
|
|
|---|---|---|
| Population density | 806 ppl/mi² | 682 ppl/mi² |
| Population density rank | 32/197 | 42/197 |
| Population |
9341
|
53170946
|
| Land area | 11.6 sq mi | 77,421 sq mi |
| Land area per capita | 33,477 sq ft | 43,155 sq ft |
| Rural population | 35.3% | 68.7% |
| Urban population | 64.7% | 31.3% |
| Living in agglomerations of 1M+ people | 0% | 3.16% |
Share of urban population by year
| Year | Urban population | |
|---|---|---|
|
Tuvalu
|
Uganda
|
|
| 2024 | 64.7% | 31.3% |
| 2023 | 64% | 30.6% |
| 2022 | 63.3% | 29.9% |
| 2021 | 62.6% | 29.2% |
| 2020 | 61.9% | 28.5% |
| 2019 | 61.2% | 27.8% |
| 2018 | 60.6% | 27.1% |
| 2017 | 60% | 26.4% |
| 2016 | 59.5% | 25.7% |
| 2015 | 58.9% | 25% |
| 2014 | 58.3% | 24.2% |
| 2013 | 57.6% | 22.7% |
| 2012 | 56.9% | 21.4% |
| 2011 | 56% | 20.1% |
| 2010 | 55% | 18.8% |
| 2009 | 54% | 17.6% |
| 2008 | 52.8% | 16.5% |
| 2007 | 51.7% | 15.5% |
| 2006 | 50.5% | 14.6% |
| 2005 | 49.4% | 13.8% |
| 2004 | 48.4% | 13.1% |
| 2003 | 47.5% | 12.6% |
| 2002 | 46.7% | 12.2% |
| 2001 | 46.1% | 11.9% |
| 2000 | 45.5% | 11.6% |
| 1999 | 45% | 11.4% |
| 1998 | 44.5% | 11.2% |
| 1997 | 44% | 11% |
| 1996 | 43.5% | 10.9% |
| 1995 | 43.1% | 10.7% |
| 1994 | 42.5% | 10.6% |
| 1993 | 42% | 10.4% |
| 1992 | 41.3% | 10.2% |
| 1991 | 40.6% | 10% |
| 1990 | 39.7% | 9.76% |
| 1989 | 38.6% | 9.47% |
| 1988 | 37.5% | 9.15% |
| 1987 | 36.4% | 8.8% |
| 1986 | 35.2% | 8.44% |
| 1985 | 34.2% | 8.09% |
| 1984 | 33.3% | 7.74% |
| 1983 | 32.6% | 7.43% |
| 1982 | 31.9% | 7.15% |
| 1981 | 31.1% | 6.92% |
| 1980 | 30.2% | 6.76% |
| 1979 | 29% | 6.65% |
| 1978 | 27.1% | 6.57% |
| 1977 | 24% | 6.51% |
| 1976 | 20.5% | 6.46% |
| 1975 | 17.3% | 6.42% |
| 1974 | 15.2% | 6.38% |
| 1973 | 14.7% | 6.34% |
| 1972 | 14.6% | 6.29% |
| 1971 | 14.5% | 6.24% |
| 1970 | 14.5% | 6.17% |
| 1969 | 14.4% | 6.09% |
| 1968 | 14.2% | 5.97% |
| 1967 | 13.9% | 5.81% |
| 1966 | 13.5% | 5.63% |
| 1965 | 13.1% | 5.42% |
| 1964 | 12.8% | 5.2% |
| 1963 | 12.6% | 4.97% |
| 1962 | 12.5% | 4.75% |
| 1961 | 12.4% | 4.55% |
| 1960 | 12.4% | 4.36% |
Data sources: World Bank | Health (1960–2024, retrieved 2026-04-06).
GeoRank.org/population-density/tuvalu/uganda | CC BY
From 2004 to 2024, the share of urban population changed from 48.4% to 64.7% in Tuvalu and from 13.1% to 31.3% in Uganda.
Densely populated cities
|
Uganda
|
|
|---|---|
| City | Population |
| Kampala | 1.68M |
| Mbale | 586K |
| Arua | 385K |
| Kira Town | 317K |
| Jinja | 279K |
| Gulu | 177K |
| Kasese | 101K |
| Entebbe | 70K |
Compare countries by 7 more topics
Population density in other countries
Data sources: World Bank | Agriculture & Rural Development (1961–2026, retrieved 2026-04-06); United Nations | World Population Prospects (1961–2026, retrieved 2026-03-10); U.S. Census Bureau (1961–2025, retrieved 2026-02-08); Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) (2000–2019, retrieved 2026-02-20).
GeoRank.org/population-density/tuvalu/uganda | CC BY
Help us show the world through your eyes
Share a photo of your city and help others discover what it looks like to live there. Your contribution makes our data come alive.
Data sources:
- World Bank | Agriculture & Rural Development (1961–2026, retrieved 2026-04-06)
- United Nations | World Population Prospects (1961–2026, retrieved 2026-03-10)
- U.S. Census Bureau (1961–2025, retrieved 2026-02-08)
- Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) (2000–2019, retrieved 2026-02-20)
- Wikidata (2014–2024, retrieved 2026-02-08)
Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) — you’re free to copy, share, remix, adapt, and use even commercially as long as you give appropriate credit and clearly indicate if you made changes. Other sources may be subject to different license terms.