There two big problems with your question. First is measuring foreign influence, especially softer factors. The second thing is seriously problematic (with hint of ideological bent) definition of neocolonialism.
1.1) Neocolonialism, cheap version - any linguistic map, showing which foreign languages are known in each country.
1.2) Neocolonialism, reasonable version - some kind of aggregate metric including not only language, but also:
- trade volume
- foreign aid
- correlation concerning voting in the United Nations
- foreign debt
2) Definition problems:
"using capitalism" - it is already problematic, whether we speak about "capitalism" in case of politicians negotiating a contract, gov owned companies implementing it and banks are financing it based on gov guarantees. Moreover, what about Soviet Union meddling in similar way, except it is hard to accuse them of being "capitalist"?
"developing countries are influenced by which developed countries"
Let's analyse relationships between Russian influence on Latvia. Occupied? Checked. Colonized? Checked. Local population still know language of colonizer? Checked. Former colonial power is able to use its influence to extract rent or strangle economy? Checked (natural gas). Significant colonizer population left behind? Checked. Everything fits perfectly... except that according to HDI (Human Development Index) Latvia is slightly more developed.