Czechia vs Mauritius: Memorandum items, Securities lent and on repo (International Reserves)

Czechia
-2.88 billion
in 2025
Mauritius
-1.64 billion
in 2025
Czechia rank
56th
Mauritius rank
54th

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

  • Czechia
  • Mauritius
-10.0B-5.0B05.0B200020122025

How they compare

Mauritius currently reports -1.64 billion against -2.88 billion in Czechia, a difference of 1.24 billion.

The two have swapped places 8 times across 19 shared years of data; in 2007 it was Mauritius ahead.

Czechia ranks 56th and Mauritius ranks 54th of 60 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Czechia averaged higher in 1 and Mauritius in 2.

Head to head by decade

Decade Czechia Mauritius Difference Ahead
2000s -908.27 million 0 908.27 million Mauritius
2010s 2.21 billion 120.25 million 2.09 billion Czechia
2020s -2.25 billion -1.14 billion 1.11 billion Mauritius

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves), Czechia or Mauritius?
Mauritius, at -1.64 billion against -2.88 billion in Czechia as of 2025.
What is the difference in memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves) between Czechia and Mauritius?
1.24 billion, with Mauritius ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Czechia and Mauritius?
19 years are reported by both, from 2007 to 2025.
How do Czechia and Mauritius rank globally for memorandum items, securities lent and on repo (international reserves)?
Czechia ranks 56th and Mauritius ranks 54th 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

Czechia vs Mauritius: 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/czechia/mauritius/

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/czechia/mauritius/">Czechia vs Mauritius: 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.