Ecuador vs Zimbabwe: 11_SDR allocation
11_SDR allocation over time
- Ecuador
- Zimbabwe
How they compare
Zimbabwe currently reports 1.35 billion against 1.27 billion in Ecuador, a difference of 78.32 million.
That makes Zimbabwe's figure about 1.1 times Ecuador's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 36 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Ecuador ahead.
Ecuador ranks 71st and Zimbabwe ranks 69th of 188 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 2 and Zimbabwe in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Ecuador | Zimbabwe | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 45.88 million | 14.21 million | 31.67 million | Ecuador |
| 2000s | 47.12 million | 14.60 million | 32.53 million | Ecuador |
| 2010s | 423.45 million | 427.57 million | 4.12 million | Zimbabwe |
| 2020s | 991.94 million | 1.07 billion | 76.15 million | Zimbabwe |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Ecuador or Zimbabwe?
- Zimbabwe, at 1.35 billion against 1.27 billion in Ecuador as of 2025.
- What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Ecuador and Zimbabwe?
- 78.32 million, with Zimbabwe ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and Zimbabwe?
- 36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
- How do Ecuador and Zimbabwe rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
- Ecuador ranks 71st and Zimbabwe ranks 69th 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
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)).