Belgium vs Germany: Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (International Reserves)

Belgium
521.70 million
in 2025
Germany
408.00 million
in 2025
Belgium rank
12th
Germany rank
13th

Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (International Reserves) over time

  • Belgium
  • Germany
-4.0B-2.0B02.0B4.0B6.0B199920122025

How they compare

Belgium currently reports 521.70 million against 408.00 million in Germany, a difference of 113.70 million.

That makes Belgium's figure about 1.3 times Germany's.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 25 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Belgium ahead.

Belgium ranks 12th and Germany ranks 13th of 60 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Belgium averaged higher in 1 and Germany in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Belgium Germany Difference Ahead
2000s -262.84 million -883.44 million 620.60 million Belgium
2010s -2.19 billion 1.96 billion 4.15 billion Germany
2020s -2.94 billion 241.53 million 3.18 billion Germany

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves), Belgium or Germany?
Belgium, at 521.70 million against 408.00 million in Germany as of 2025.
What is the difference in memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves) between Belgium and Germany?
113.70 million, with Belgium ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Belgium and Germany?
25 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2025.
How do Belgium and Germany rank globally for memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves)?
Belgium ranks 12th and Germany ranks 13th of 60 countries.
Where does this data come from?
International Monetary Fund, published as Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (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

Belgium vs Germany: Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (International Reserves). Statizoid, drawing on International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 13 September 2026, from https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/memorandum-items-securities-lent-and-on-repo-international-reserves-and-foreign-currency/belgium/germany/

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-securities-lent-and-on-repo-international-reserves-and-foreign-currency/belgium/germany/">Belgium vs Germany: Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (International Reserves)</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (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
62 places, 1,260 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.