Australia vs Brazil: Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market)

Australia
1.65 billion
in 2025
Brazil
1.42 billion
in 2025
Australia rank
2nd
Brazil rank
3rd

Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market) over time

  • Australia
  • Brazil
-30.0B-20.0B-10.0B0200020122025

How they compare

Australia currently reports 1.65 billion against 1.42 billion in Brazil, a difference of 226.21 million.

That makes Australia's figure about 1.2 times Brazil's.

The two have swapped places 11 times across 26 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Brazil ahead.

Australia ranks 2nd and Brazil ranks 3rd of 66 countries.

Brazil has averaged higher in every one of the 3 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia Brazil Difference Ahead
2000s -15.20 billion 69.07 million 15.27 billion Brazil
2010s 203.57 million 411.37 million 207.80 million Brazil
2020s 177.97 million 474.76 million 296.79 million Brazil

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher memorandum items, financial derivatives (net marked to market), Australia or Brazil?
Australia, at 1.65 billion against 1.42 billion in Brazil as of 2025.
What is the difference in memorandum items, financial derivatives (net marked to market) between Australia and Brazil?
226.21 million, with Australia ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and Brazil?
26 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2025.
How do Australia and Brazil rank globally for memorandum items, financial derivatives (net marked to market)?
Australia ranks 2nd and Brazil ranks 3rd of 66 countries.
Where does this data come from?
International Monetary Fund, published as Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market), Assets (International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity: Guidelines for a Data Template 2013 (IRFCL 2013), Monetary Authorities and Central Government excluding Social Security). Statizoid refreshes it automatically from the source and publishes the full history for both places.

Individual pages

Share, cite or embed this page

Cite this page

Australia vs Brazil: Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market). Statizoid, drawing on International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 14 September 2026, from https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/memorandum-items-financial-derivatives-net-marked-to-market-assets-international-reserves/australia/brazil/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under IMF Terms and Conditions (attribution required); please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/memorandum-items-financial-derivatives-net-marked-to-market-assets-international-reserves/australia/brazil/">Australia vs Brazil: Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Memorandum items, Financial derivatives (net marked to market), Assets (International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity: Guidelines for a Data Template 2013 (IRFCL 2013), Monetary Authorities and Central Government excluding Social Security)
Source
International Monetary Fund
Licence
IMF Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
68 places, 1,199 data points, 1999–2025
Last refreshed

The International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity (IRFCL, or the “Reserves Data Template”) dataset includes data on the amount and composition of countries’ official reserve assets, other foreign currency assets held by monetary authorities and central governments, and short-term foreign currency obligations and related activities of monetary authorities and central governments that can lead to drains on official reserves and other foreign currency assets. This website re-disseminates IMF member countries' data on international reserves and foreign currency liquidity in a common template and in a common currency (the U.S. dollar). Historical data by country are also available. Please note that the re-dissemination of the template data by the Fund does not constitute endorsement of the quality of the data by the Fund.