Cuba vs French Southern and Antarctic Lands

Cuba is 14 times larger than French Southern and Antarctic Lands. French Southern and Antarctic Lands would fit into Cuba about 14 times.

CubaFrench Southern and Antarctic LandsCuba moved onto French Southern and Antarctic Lands · Equal-area projection
14×
Cuba is 14× the area of French Southern and Antarctic Lands.
CubaFrench Southern and Antarctic Lands
Area109,884 km²7,829 km²
Population10,937,203196
Density100 / km²0.03 / km²
CapitalHavanaPort-aux-Français
RegionCaribbeanSeven seas (open ocean)
CoastlineHas a coastHas a coast
Neighbours00

Why the map you grew up with disagrees

On a Mercator map, area grows with distance from the equator. Cuba sits at about 22°N and is stretched to 1.16× its true area; French Southern and Antarctic Lands at 49° S is stretched to 2.35×. That difference is why French Southern and Antarctic Lands looks so much bigger than it is next to Cuba. The figure above uses the Equal Earth projection, where every square kilometre is drawn the same size.

Questions about this pair

Is Cuba bigger than French Southern and Antarctic Lands?
Yes. Cuba is 14 times larger than French Southern and Antarctic Lands. Cuba covers 109,884 km² and French Southern and Antarctic Lands covers 7,829 km².
How many times does French Southern and Antarctic Lands fit into Cuba?
About 14 times: Cuba has 14× the area of French Southern and Antarctic Lands.
Why do Cuba and French Southern and Antarctic Lands look different on Google Maps?
Web maps use the Mercator projection, which stretches area with distance from the equator. Cuba is drawn about 1.16× its true area there and French Southern and Antarctic Lands about 2.35×. That is why French Southern and Antarctic Lands looks so much bigger than it really is next to Cuba. Kartavera uses Equal Earth, where every square kilometre is drawn the same size.
Which has more people, Cuba or French Southern and Antarctic Lands?
Cuba: 10,937,203 people against 196. Density: Cuba 100 per km², French Southern and Antarctic Lands 0.03 per km².