Sweden vs Switzerland: 11_SDR allocation
11_SDR allocation over time
- Sweden
- Switzerland
How they compare
Switzerland currently reports 11.72 billion against 8.63 billion in Sweden, a difference of 3.09 billion.
That makes Switzerland's figure about 1.4 times Sweden's.
The two have swapped places 1 time across 36 shared years of data; in 1990 it was Sweden ahead.
Sweden ranks 20th and Switzerland ranks 19th of 188 countries.
Across the 4 decades both report, Sweden averaged higher in 2 and Switzerland in 2.
Head to head by decade
| Decade | Sweden | Switzerland | Difference | Ahead |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1990s | 343.45 million | 0 | 343.45 million | Sweden |
| 2000s | 352.78 million | 0 | 352.78 million | Sweden |
| 2010s | 3.30 billion | 4.83 billion | 1.53 billion | Switzerland |
| 2020s | 6.87 billion | 9.43 billion | 2.57 billion | Switzerland |
Averages of every year both report within each decade.
Frequently asked questions
- Which has higher 11_sdr allocation, Sweden or Switzerland?
- Switzerland, at 11.72 billion against 8.63 billion in Sweden as of 2025.
- What is the difference in 11_sdr allocation between Sweden and Switzerland?
- 3.09 billion, with Switzerland ahead.
- How many years of comparable data are there for Sweden and Switzerland?
- 36 years are reported by both, from 1990 to 2025.
- How do Sweden and Switzerland rank globally for 11_sdr allocation?
- Sweden ranks 20th and Switzerland ranks 19th 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)).