Eswatini vs Lesotho: 11_SDR allocation
11_SDR allocation over time
- Eswatini
- Lesotho
How they compare
Eswatini currently reports 164.12 million against 132.57 million in Lesotho, a difference of 31.55 million.
That makes Eswatini's figure about 1.2 times Lesotho's.
Across all 36 years both countries report, Eswatini has been ahead every year.
Eswatini ranks 156th and Lesotho ranks 159th of 188 countries.
Eswatini has averaged higher in every one of the 4 decades both report.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Eswatini | Lesotho | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 8.96 million | 5.21 million | 3.75 million | Eswatini |
| 2000s | 9.20 million | 5.35 million | 3.85 million | Eswatini |
| 2010s | 70.91 million | 48.28 million | 22.62 million | Eswatini |
| 2020s | 133.16 million | 104.72 million | 28.44 million | Eswatini |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Eswatini or Lesotho?
- Eswatini, at 164.12 million against 132.57 million in Lesotho as of 2025.
- What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Eswatini and Lesotho?
- 31.55 million, with Eswatini ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Eswatini and Lesotho?
- 36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
- How do Eswatini and Lesotho rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
- Eswatini ranks 156th and Lesotho ranks 159th 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)).