Czechia vs Hungary: 11_SDR allocation

Czechia
3.81 billion
in 2025
Hungary
3.79 billion
in 2025
Czechia rank
42nd
Hungary rank
44th

11_SDR allocation over time

  • Czechia
  • Hungary
01.0B2.0B3.0B4.0B199020072025

How they compare

Czechia currently reports 3.81 billion against 3.79 billion in Hungary, a difference of 25.73 million.

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

Czechia ranks 42nd and Hungary ranks 44th of 188 countries.

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

Head to head by decade

Decade Czechia Hungary Difference Ahead
1990s 0 0 0 β€”
2000s 0 0 0 β€”
2010s 1.15 billion 1.46 billion 309.63 million Hungary
2020s 2.94 billion 3.02 billion 80.40 million Hungary

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Czechia or Hungary?
Czechia, at 3.81 billion against 3.79 billion in Hungary as of 2025.
What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Czechia and Hungary?
25.73 million, with Czechia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Czechia and Hungary?
36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
How do Czechia and Hungary rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
Czechia ranks 42nd and Hungary ranks 44th 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)).