The sequence might be characterised like this: there was a 50 per cent depreciation; a $ billion IMF/USA rescue package was made available: not all of this was needed, and a large part of it was repaid within a year.
Private capital flow returned relatively quickly, particularly direct foreign investment (and, in fact, Mexico’s foreign debt is larger now than in 1994); the annual GDP growth figures were minus 6 per cent in the year following the crisis, and plus 5 per cent in the year after that, so that two years later GDP is back somewhere near the original starting point;  17  It was unlike most earlier IMF crises, in that neither budget deficits nor lax monetary policy were the cause - see Macfarlane (1997a).