Albania vs Chad: 11_SDR allocation

Albania
239.12 million
in 2025
Chad
249.79 million
in 2025
Albania rank
149th
Chad rank
146th

11_SDR allocation over time

  • Albania
  • Chad
0100.0M200.0M300.0M199020072025

How they compare

Chad currently reports 249.79 million against 239.12 million in Albania, a difference of 10.67 million.

Across all 36 years both countries report, Chad has been ahead every year.

Albania ranks 149th and Chad ranks 146th of 188 countries.

Chad has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Albania Chad Difference Ahead
1990s 0 13.11 million 13.11 million Chad
2000s 0 13.46 million 13.46 million Chad
2010s 68.21 million 78.74 million 10.53 million Chad
2020s 182.92 million 193.44 million 10.53 million Chad

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Albania or Chad?
Chad, at 249.79 million against 239.12 million in Albania as of 2025.
What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Albania and Chad?
10.67 million, with Chad ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Albania and Chad?
36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
How do Albania and Chad rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
Albania ranks 149th and Chad ranks 146th of 188 countries.
Where does this data come from?
IMF, published as 11_SDR allocation. Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

About this data

Indicator
11_SDR allocation
Source
IMF
Licence
CC BY 4.0 (World Bank Open Data)
Coverage
189 places, 6,685 data points, 1990–2025
Last refreshed

SDRs are international reserve assets created by the IMF and allocated to members to supplement existing official reserves. Holdings of SDRs by an IMF member are recorded as an asset, while the allocation of SDRs is recorded as the incurrence of a liability of the member receiving them. The membership of the SDR Department incurs the asset and liability position among themselves, not with the IMF. The holdings and allocations should be shown gross, rather than netted (Balance of Payments and International Investment Position Manual, sixth edition (BPM6)).