Chile vs Libya: 11_SDR allocation

Chile
3.31 billion
in 2025
Libya
3.43 billion
in 2025
Chile rank
53rd
Libya rank
52nd

11_SDR allocation over time

  • Chile
  • Libya
01.0B2.0B3.0B4.0B199020072025

How they compare

Libya currently reports 3.43 billion against 3.31 billion in Chile, a difference of 121.99 million.

The two have swapped places 1 time across 36 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Chile ahead.

Chile ranks 53rd and Libya ranks 52nd of 188 countries.

Across the 4 decades both report, Chile averaged higher in 2 and Libya in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Chile Libya Difference Ahead
1990s 169.86 million 81.88 million 87.98 million Chile
2000s 174.48 million 84.10 million 90.37 million Chile
2010s 1.20 billion 1.58 billion 375.64 million Libya
2020s 2.61 billion 2.81 billion 200.94 million Libya

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Chile or Libya?
Libya, at 3.43 billion against 3.31 billion in Chile as of 2025.
What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Chile and Libya?
121.99 million, with Libya ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and Libya?
36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
How do Chile and Libya rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
Chile ranks 53rd and Libya ranks 52nd 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)).