Ecuador vs United Arab Emirates: IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre

Ecuador
26,550 units per square kilometre
in 2023
United Arab Emirates
23,832 units per square kilometre
in 2023
Ecuador rank
39th
United Arab Emirates rank
42nd

IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre over time

  • Ecuador
  • United Arab Emirates
010.0k20.0k30.0k196119922023

How they compare

Ecuador currently reports 26,550 units per square kilometre against 23,832 units per square kilometre in United Arab Emirates, a difference of 2,718 units per square kilometre.

That makes Ecuador's figure about 1.1 times United Arab Emirates's.

The two have swapped places 6 times across 63 shared years of data; in 1961 it was Ecuador ahead.

Ecuador ranks 39th and United Arab Emirates ranks 42nd of 189 countries.

Across the 7 decades both report, Ecuador averaged higher in 1 and United Arab Emirates in 6.

Head to head by decade

Decade Ecuador United Arab Emirates Difference Ahead
1960s 97.97 units per square kilometre 0 units per square kilometre 97.97 units per square kilometre Ecuador
1970s 139.45 units per square kilometre 314.76 units per square kilometre 175.3 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates
1980s 1,220 units per square kilometre 1,264 units per square kilometre 44.48 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates
1990s 1,084 units per square kilometre 2,823 units per square kilometre 1,739 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates
2000s 1,555 units per square kilometre 6,626 units per square kilometre 5,071 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates
2010s 2,651 units per square kilometre 14,922 units per square kilometre 12,271 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates
2020s 24,165 units per square kilometre 24,272 units per square kilometre 107.33 units per square kilometre United Arab Emirates

Averages of every year both report within each decade.

Frequently asked questions

Which has higher imf holdings of currency, sdr, per square kilometre, Ecuador or United Arab Emirates?
Ecuador, at 26,550 units per square kilometre against 23,832 units per square kilometre in United Arab Emirates as of 2023.
What is the difference in imf holdings of currency, sdr, per square kilometre between Ecuador and United Arab Emirates?
2,718 units per square kilometre, with Ecuador ahead.
How many years of comparable data are there for Ecuador and United Arab Emirates?
63 years are reported by both, from 1961 to 2023.
How do Ecuador and United Arab Emirates rank globally for imf holdings of currency, sdr, per square kilometre?
Ecuador ranks 39th and United Arab Emirates ranks 42nd of 189 countries.
Where does this data come from?
Statizoid (derived), published as IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre. 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

Ecuador vs United Arab Emirates: IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre. Statizoid, drawing on Statizoid (derived). Retrieved 12 October 2026, from https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/imf-holdings-of-currency-sdr-per-square-kilometre/ecuador/united-arab-emirates/

Embed or link this data

Paste this into a page to link back to these figures. The data itself is free to reuse under Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page; please keep the attribution.

<a href="https://economy.statizoid.com/compare/imf-holdings-of-currency-sdr-per-square-kilometre/ecuador/united-arab-emirates/">Ecuador vs United Arab Emirates: IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre</a> — Statizoid

About this data

Indicator
IMF holdings of currency, SDR, per square kilometre
Unit
units per square kilometre
Source
Statizoid (derived)
Licence
Derived by Statizoid from the sources named on the page
Coverage
191 places, 10,792 data points, 1961–2023
Last refreshed

IMF holdings of currency, SDR divided by Land area (sq. km), matched on country and year. Neither publisher issues this ratio as a series; it is computed here from both.