Australia vs China: Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets

Australia
3.71 billion
in 2025
China
7.36 billion
in 2025
Australia rank
3rd
China rank
1st

Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets over time

  • Australia
  • China
010.0B20.0B30.0B40.0B201520202025

How they compare

China currently reports 7.36 billion against 3.71 billion in Australia, a difference of 3.65 billion.

That makes China's figure about 2.0 times Australia's.

Across all 11 years both countries report, China has been ahead every year.

Australia ranks 3rd and China ranks 1st of 53 countries.

China has averaged higher in every one of the 2 decades both report.

Head to head by decade

Decade Australia China Difference Ahead
2010s 1.96 billion 16.30 billion 14.34 billion China
2020s 2.83 billion 8.95 billion 6.13 billion China

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets, Australia or China?
China, at 7.36 billion against 3.71 billion in Australia as of 2025.
What is the difference in predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets between Australia and China?
3.65 billion, with China ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Australia and China?
11 years are reported by both, from 2015 to 2025.
How do Australia and China rank globally for predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets?
Australia ranks 3rd and China ranks 1st of 53 countries.
Where does this data come from?
International Monetary Fund, published as Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets (nominal value), Other predetermined short term net drains on foreign currency assets, Up to 1 month (International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity: Guidelines for a Data Template 2013 (IRFCL 2013), Monetary Authorities and Centr. 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 China: Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets. Statizoid, drawing on International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 26 August 2026, from https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/predetermined-short-term-net-drains-on-foreign-currency-assets-nominal-value-other/australia/china/

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/predetermined-short-term-net-drains-on-foreign-currency-assets-nominal-value-other/australia/china/">Australia vs China: Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets (nominal value), Other predetermined short term net drains on foreign currency assets, Up to 1 month (International Reserves and Foreign Currency Liquidity: Guidelines for a Data Template 2013 (IRFCL 2013), Monetary Authorities and Centr
Source
International Monetary Fund
Licence
IMF Terms and Conditions (attribution required)
Coverage
55 places, 1,039 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.