Country comparison · 87 cities measured
Chile vs Malaysia Air quality index (AQI) and deforestation
Chile has cleaner air than Malaysia right now: its cities average AQI 60 against 65.
Malaysia has lost more forest since 2001. Malaysia has more tree cover in its cities.
Updated . Lower is better on the US EPA index: 0–50 is Good, above 300 is Hazardous. Measured by Airleaf.
Chile60Malaysia65
Head to head
Chile vs Malaysia at a glance
Chile is ahead on 3 of 5 measures, and Malaysia on 2. The better figure in each row is marked.
| Chile | Malaysia | |
|---|---|---|
| Average air qualityUS AQI, all measured cities. | 60 (better) | 65 |
| Cities over AQI 100Not fine for sensitive groups. | 6% | 5% (better) |
| Forest lost since 2001The whole country. | 2.43 million ha (better) | 9.77 million ha |
| Share of its forest lostOf what it had in 2000. | 14% (better) | 33% |
| Average tree coverAcross its measured cities. | 12.9% | 38.7% (better) |
Air quality today
Is Chile cleaner than Malaysia?
On air quality, yes, right now. Chile has cleaner air than Malaysia right now: its cities average AQI 60 against 65.
6% of the measured cities in Chile are over AQI 100 today, the point where the air stops being fine for sensitive groups, against 5% in Malaysia.
How each country's cities split across the air quality bands
Chile
- Good12 (39%)
- Moderate17 (55%)
- Unhealthy for sensitive groups2 (6%)
Malaysia
- Good15 (27%)
- Moderate38 (68%)
- Unhealthy for sensitive groups3 (5%)
Every measured city, including model estimates where no ground station is near.
Against everywhere else
How do Chile and Malaysia compare with other countries?
Right now the cities of Chile average cleaner air than 38% of the 171 countries Airleaf has enough cities to average, and those of Malaysia than 30%.
Cleaner air than…
- Chile
- Beats 38%
- Malaysia
- Beats 30%
More tree cover than…
- Chile
- Beats 25%
- Malaysia
- Beats 85%
Deforestation · 2001–2025
Which country has lost more forest, Chile or Malaysia?
Malaysia has lost more: about 9.77 million ha of forest from 2001 to 2025, against 2.43 million ha in Chile, or 4 times as much. 7.55 million ha of Malaysia's was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns; the rest burned, was logged or can grow back.
The whole country, from the yearly satellite maps of forest loss: unlike the city averages above, this counts every forest, not just the land around cities.
Worst year: 2017, with 214,000 ha lost.
Worst year: 2014, with 643,000 ha lost.
| Chile | Malaysia | |
|---|---|---|
| Forest lost since 2001Cleared, burned or logged. | 2.43 million ha (better) | 9.77 million ha |
| Share of its forestOf what it had in 2000. | 14% (better) | 33% |
| Cleared for goodTurned into farms, mines or towns. | 96,100 ha (better) | 7.55 million ha |
| Recent trend2021–2025 against the five years before. | Slowing down | Slowing down |
| Main known cause | Logging (82%) | Farms, pasture and plantations (74%) |
Trees
Which country has more tree cover, Chile or Malaysia?
Malaysia does: its measured cities average 38.7% tree cover against 12.9%, a gap of 25.9 percentage points.
| Chile | Malaysia | |
|---|---|---|
| Trees standingSummed across measured cities. | 1.2M | 6.3M (better) |
| Cities below their targetShort of the canopy target. | 94% | 45% (better) |
| Trees still neededTo reach those targets. | 1.6M | 518K (better) |
Behind the averages
The cities behind Chile and Malaysia
An average says nothing about how far apart the best and worst places are. These are the measured cities at each end.
Malaysia
- Greenest measured city
- Ijok81.0% tree cover
- Worst air right now
- Selayang Baru UtaraAQI 137
Reading these numbers
What a country average is, and is not
It is a mean of cities
Not a national statistic. Each figure is the average across the cities Airleaf has measured: 31 in Chile and 56 in Malaysia, each read over the same 2 km radius, on the US EPA index. Rural land and unmeasured towns are not in it.
Coverage shapes the number
A country measured mostly in its capital reads differently from one measured across dozens of towns. Malaysia rests on 56 cities against 31, so its average is the steadier of the two. Forest figures come from the University of Maryland's Global Forest Change maps.
Frequently asked
Chile vs Malaysia: your questions answered
Is Chile cleaner than Malaysia?
On air quality, yes, right now: Chile's cities average AQI 60 against 65 on the US EPA index. These are live readings averaged across cities, so the gap moves with the weather.
Which country has lost more forest, Chile or Malaysia?
Malaysia has lost more: about 9.77 million ha of forest from 2001 to 2025, against 2.43 million ha in Chile, or 4 times as much. 7.55 million ha of Malaysia's was cleared for good, for farms, mines or towns; the rest burned, was logged or can grow back.
Which country has more tree cover, Chile or Malaysia?
Malaysia does: its measured cities average 38.7% tree cover against 12.9%, a gap of 25.9 percentage points.
How many cities are the Chile and Malaysia figures based on?
31 measured cities in Chile and 56 in Malaysia. Every one was read the same way, so the two averages are directly comparable, but a country with more measured cities has the more settled figure.
Does this cover the whole of Chile and Malaysia?
The air and tree figures are not: they are the cities Airleaf has measured, each over the same 2 km radius, so treat them as a comparison of urban air and urban tree cover. The forest figures are: they count every forest in the country.
More comparisons for Chile
More comparisons for Malaysia
Build your own
Compare Chile with somewhere else
This place
Chile