Chile vs New Zealand: Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets

Chile
-5.04 billion
in 2025
New Zealand
-5.56 billion
in 2025
Chile rank
60th
New Zealand rank
63rd

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

  • Chile
  • New Zealand
-12.5B-10.0B-7.5B-5.0B-2.5B0200020122025

How they compare

Chile currently reports -5.04 billion against -5.56 billion in New Zealand, a difference of 518.75 million.

The two have swapped places 4 times across 26 shared years of data; in 2000 it was Chile ahead.

Chile ranks 60th and New Zealand ranks 63rd of 90 countries.

Across the 3 decades both report, Chile averaged higher in 2 and New Zealand in 1.

Head to head by decade

Decade Chile New Zealand Difference Ahead
2000s -2.08 billion -4.56 billion 2.48 billion Chile
2010s -4.14 billion -8.28 billion 4.14 billion Chile
2020s -4.35 billion -2.89 billion 1.45 billion New Zealand

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets, Chile or New Zealand?
Chile, at -5.04 billion against -5.56 billion in New Zealand as of 2025.
What is the difference in predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets between Chile and New Zealand?
518.75 million, with Chile ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Chile and New Zealand?
26 years are reported by both, from 2000 to 2025.
How do Chile and New Zealand rank globally for predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets?
Chile ranks 60th and New Zealand ranks 63rd of 90 countries.
Where does this data come from?
International Monetary Fund, published as Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets (nominal value) (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

Chile vs New Zealand: Predetermined short-term net drains on foreign currency assets. Statizoid, drawing on International Monetary Fund. Retrieved 01 September 2026, from https://financial-sector.statizoid.com/compare/predetermined-short-term-net-drains-on-foreign-currency-assets-nominal-value/chile/new-zealand/

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/chile/new-zealand/">Chile vs New Zealand: 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) (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
92 places, 1,913 data points, 1995–2025
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.