Connect with us

Crypto

Revealed: Countries with the Highest Cryptocurrency Ownership, 2024 – CEOWORLD magazine

Published

on

Revealed: Countries with the Highest Cryptocurrency Ownership, 2024 – CEOWORLD magazine

A recent report by CEOWORLD magazine has ranked countries based on their cryptocurrency ownership rates. The study found that the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has the highest percentage of its population who own crypto, with almost 30.39% of the UAE’s total population owning crypto. This is largely due to the country’s favorable regulations towards blockchain technology, and the use of cryptocurrency is legal. Vietnam ranks second-highest among countries with the highest cryptocurrency ownership, with almost 21.19% of the total population owning crypto. The rapid digitization of the economy in Vietnam is responsible for the surge in crypto ownership across the country.

It is worth noting that if we were to rank countries based on the number of people who own cryptocurrency, India would come in first place with 93 million crypto owners, followed by China with 59 million, and the US with 52 million crypto owners coming in third place.

Countries with the Highest Cryptocurrency Ownership, 2024

Rank Country Population Ownership Ownership Percentage
1 United Arab Emirates 9,516,871 2,892,107 30.39
2 Vietnam 98,858,950 20,945,706 21.19
3 United States 339,996,563 52,888,108 15.56
4 Iran 89,172,767 12,000,000 13.46
5 Philippines 117,337,368 15,761,549 13.43
6 Brazil 216,422,446 25,955,176 11.99
7 Saudi Arabia 36,947,025 4,201,789 11.37
8 Singapore 6,014,723 664,627 11.05
9 Ukraine 36,744,634 3,885,037 10.57
10 Venezuela 28,838,499 2,970,365 10.3
11 South Africa 60,414,495 6,041,450 10
12 El Salvador 6,364,943 636,494 10
13 Argentina 45,773,884 4,451,944 9.73
14 Thailand 71,801,279 6,902,630 9.61
15 Canada 38,781,291 2,714,177 7
16 Pakistan 240,485,658 15,879,216 6.6
17 India 1,428,627,663 93,537,015 6.55
18 Mexico 128,455,567 8,409,115 6.55
19 Russia 144,444,359 8,749,780 6.06
20 Nigeria 223,804,632 13,261,259 5.93
21 Germany 83,294,633 4,814,430 5.78
22 United Kingdom 67,736,802 3,888,092 5.74
23 Turkey 85,816,199 4,825,626 5.62
24 Kenya 55,100,586 2,796,738 5.08
25 Morocco 37,840,044 1,921,753 5.08
26 Colombia 52,085,168 2,582,764 4.96
27 France 64,756,584 3,056,511 4.72
28 Nepal 30,896,590 1,410,342 4.56
29 Indonesia 277,534,122 12,205,132 4.4
30 China 1,425,671,352 59,134,683 4.15
31 Japan 123,294,513 5,096,970 4.13
32 South Korea 51,784,059 2,120,185 4.09
33 Ecuador 18,190,484 695,148 3.82
34 Cambodia 16,944,826 582,232 3.44
35 Spain 47,519,628 1,452,158 3.06
36 Egypt 112,716,598 3,423,723 3.04
37 Belarus 9,498,238 285,325 3
38 Malaysia 34,308,525 1,011,146 2.95
39 Poland 41,026,067 1,200,394 2.93
40 Netherlands 17,618,299 489,182 2.78
41 Australia 26,439,111 726,241 2.75
42 Portugal 10,247,605 276,185 2.7
43 Peru 34,352,719 881,811 2.57
44 Bangladesh 172,954,319 4,318,791 2.5
45 Italy 58,870,762 1,469,892 2.5
46 Lebanon 5,353,930 132,845 2.48
47 Hong Kong 7,491,609 180,991 2.42
48 Tanzania 67,438,106 1,621,947 2.41
49 Georgia 3,728,282 89,055 2.39
50 Taiwan 23,923,276 567,594 2.37
51 Palestine 5,371,230 126,293 2.35
52 Honduras 10,593,798 241,679 2.28
53 Bulgaria 6,687,717 150,302 2.25
54 Algeria 45,606,480 1,022,874 2.24
55 Ghana 34,121,985 759,162 2.22
56 Seychelles 107,660 2,347 2.18
57 Chile 19,629,590 421,831 2.15
58 Dominican Republic 11,332,972 243,632 2.15
59 Moldova 3,435,931 72,498 2.11
60 Tunisia 12,458,223 257,623 2.07
61 Jamaica 2,825,544 58,011 2.05
62 Bolivia 12,388,571 252,801 2.04
63 Switzerland 8,796,669 177,525 2.02
64 Somalia 18,143,378 351,706 1.94
65 Czech Republic 10,495,295 200,955 1.91
66 Sri Lanka 21,893,579 416,339 1.9
67 Iraq 45,504,560 845,138 1.86
68 Mozambique 33,897,354 630,991 1.86
69 Ivory Coast 28,873,034 537,819 1.86
70 Serbia 7,149,077 131,775 1.84
71 Ethiopia 126,527,060 2,259,197 1.79
72 Belize 410,825 7,366 1.79
73 Costa Rica 5,212,173 92,614 1.78
74 Kazakhstan 19,606,633 341,971 1.74
75 Armenia 2,777,970 48,266 1.74
76 DR Congo 102,262,808 1,758,920 1.72
77 Kyrgyzstan 6,735,347 115,621 1.72
78 Cameroon 28,647,293 481,930 1.68
79 Romania 19,892,812 333,758 1.68
80 Bahamas 412,623 6,638 1.61
81 Sweden 10,612,086 170,092 1.6
82 Jordan 11,337,052 178,935 1.58
83 Estonia 1,322,765 20,564 1.55
84 Greece 10,341,277 157,757 1.53
85 Myanmar 54,577,997 806,426 1.48
86 Rwanda 14,094,683 208,229 1.48
87 Slovakia 5,795,199 85,537 1.48
88 Uzbekistan 35,163,944 512,332 1.46
89 Guatemala 18,092,026 263,422 1.46
90 Belgium 11,686,140 168,588 1.44
91 Mongolia 3,447,157 49,553 1.44
92 Zimbabwe 16,665,409 238,138 1.43
93 Finland 5,545,475 77,263 1.39
94 Laos 7,633,779 105,579 1.38
95 Barbados 281,995 3,856 1.37
96 Uruguay 3,423,108 46,251 1.35
97 Albania 2,832,439 38,109 1.35
98 Austria 8,958,960 120,181 1.34
99 Hungary 10,156,239 134,603 1.33
100 Panama 4,468,087 59,505 1.33
101 Senegal 17,763,163 230,279 1.3
102 Benin 13,712,828 178,470 1.3
103 Latvia 1,830,211 23,797 1.3
104 New Zealand 5,228,100 67,275 1.29
105 Mali 23,293,698 293,819 1.26
106 Croatia 4,008,617 50,520 1.26
107 Togo 9,053,799 113,348 1.25
108 Israel 9,174,520 113,814 1.24
109 Nicaragua 7,046,310 87,095 1.24
110 Paraguay 6,861,524 85,078 1.24
111 Mauritius 1,300,557 16,082 1.24
112 Lithuania 2,718,352 33,462 1.23
113 Cyprus 1,260,138 15,415 1.22
114 North Macedonia 2,085,679 25,111 1.2
115 Uganda 48,582,334 578,284 1.19
116 Denmark 5,910,913 70,605 1.19
117 Madagascar 30,325,732 356,559 1.18
118 Azerbaijan 10,412,651 121,397 1.17
119 Norway 5,474,360 63,735 1.16
120 Slovenia 2,119,675 24,498 1.16
121 Montenegro 626,485 7,239 1.16
122 Bosnia and Herzegovina 3,210,847 36,202 1.13
123 Ireland 5,056,935 56,166 1.11
124 Saint Lucia 180,251 2,002 1.11
125 Zambia 20,569,737 220,509 1.07
126 Trinidad and Tobago 1,534,937 16,467 1.07
127 Angola 36,684,202 381,696 1.04
128 Namibia 2,604,172 26,961 1.04
129 Botswana 2,675,352 27,457 1.03
130 Malta 535,064 5,504 1.03
131 Maldives 521,021 5,353 1.03
132 Luxembourg 654,768 6,484 0.99
133 Suriname 623,236 6,170 0.99
134 Fiji 936,375 9,082 0.97
135 Iceland 375,318 3,626 0.97
136 Burkina Faso 23,251,485 223,201 0.96
137 Haiti 11,724,763 111,385 0.95
138 Tajikistan 10,143,543 95,902 0.95
139 Republic of the Congo 6,106,869 58,015 0.95
140 Libya 6,888,388 64,863 0.94
141 Gabon 2,436,566 22,528 0.92
142 Bahrain 1,485,509 13,536 0.91
143 Afghanistan 42,239,854 381,110 0.9
144 Malawi 20,931,751 187,835 0.9
145 Qatar 2,716,391 24,557 0.9
146 Guyana 813,834 7,127 0.88
147 Brunei 452,524 3,892 0.86

Have you read?
Best countries for hiring freelancers.
Highest Paid Big Pharma CEOs And Top Executives.
Best Websites For CEOs, business leaders, and high-net-worth individuals.
Best Executive Search Firms And Consultants in America.
Revealed: Most Powerful Women In The World.


Add CEOWORLD magazine to your Google News feed.


Follow CEOWORLD magazine headlines on: Google News, LinkedIn, Twitter, and Facebook.

Advertisement

This report/news/ranking/statistics has been prepared only for general guidance on matters of interest and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, CEOWORLD magazine does not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone
else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it.


Copyright 2024 The CEOWORLD magazine. All rights reserved. This material (and any extract from it) must not be copied, redistributed or placed on any website, without CEOWORLD magazine’ prior written consent. For media queries, please contact: info@ceoworld.biz


SUBSCRIBE NEWSLETTER

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Crypto

Better Cryptocurrency to Buy With $5,000 and Hold Forever: XRP vs. Ethereum | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Better Cryptocurrency to Buy With ,000 and Hold Forever: XRP vs. Ethereum | The Motley Fool

Both Ethereum (ETH 6.03%) and XRP (XRP 3.76%) are tried-and-tested blockchains which have survived (and sometimes thrived) for years on end. That means they’re both sturdy enough to be candidates for a big investment, like $5,000, and for holding over the very long term, or even forever.

So which of these two leading coins is the better option for a forever hold?

Image source: Getty Images.

Ethereum has more ways to grow

Forever is a long time, especially for an investment in an emerging sector like crypto. Therefore, an asset’s optionality regarding where it can derive growth is a key factor, as today’s growth drivers might peter out and new ones are likely to emerge.

On that front, Ethereum has plenty of options. It already hosts a large decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem worth more than $53 billion today, powered by a massive stablecoin base of $159 billion. That existing base of capital is a strategic asset because it gives developers and financial institutions a reason to build new products right where liquidity already lives. It also gives investors exposure to many possible growth lanes at once, from the onboarding of tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) to the development of new settlement rails for payments between AI agents.

Advertisement
Ethereum Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(-6.03%) $-123.58

Current Price

$1924.97

Another advantage is that Ethereum has a track record of consistently shipping large protocol upgrades. The Pectra upgrade, for example, landed on the mainnet in May 2025, followed by the Fusaka upgrade in December. Two similarly large feature packages are expected for 2026, and they should help to build the chain’s ability to scale up without spiking transaction costs.

If you plan to hold an asset indefinitely, this network’s culture of iterative improvement reduces the risk that its technical capabilities will become irrelevant as emerging opportunities for growth arise. Its habit of attracting and retaining substantial capital also helps prevent that outcome.

XRP has to keep winning specific fights over time

XRP is not a bad crypto asset by any means, but its long-term burden is its far narrower positioning than Ethereum.

Ripple, the coin’s issuer, built the XRP Ledger (XRPL) ecosystem as a toolkit of financial technologies to support specific workflows in institutional finance, especially cross-border payments and money transfers, and, more recently, the management of tokenized asset capital. The coin’s value is thus derived from the utility of its ledger.

Advertisement

That focus could pay off if the financial companies the chain targets like what it’s offering, but it also concentrates risk. Financial institutions move cautiously, and winning them over is a slow, grinding process of catering to their needs and building strong relationships. Their technology adoption process can stall for years, even when the product works, and decision-makers broadly want to adopt the new tech.

To Ripple’s credit, the XRP Ledger includes plenty of features that match institutional requirements and seek to minimize their potential pain points. The network’s authorized trust lines, for instance, let tokenized asset issuers whitelist who can hold their issued tokens, which is a feature that supports regulatory constraints around who can legally custody an asset. Similarly, the ledger supports freezing tokens when suspicious activity appears, which is a control that traditional finance teams tend to expect in regulated asset workflows.

XRP Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(-3.76%) $-0.05

Current Price

$1.35

Advertisement

But holding a coin forever is unforgiving of sustained competitive pressure, which XRP doubtlessly faces. Its competitors include fintech companies and other cryptocurrencies, not to mention the internal tech development capabilities of many of its target users in big banks. So it’ll need to continuously one up the other players in its space if it’s going to grow over the long term, and it’s hard to believe that it’ll win every round that counts.

The verdict

The decision here is about resilience and resources.

Advertisement

Ethereum’s “grizzled veteran” reputation today stems from surviving numerous shifts in user demand patterns while maintaining a large on-chain capital pool and growing it all the while. Its success or failure in any given crypto market segment is not guaranteed, nor was it in the past, but its constant evolution has ensured that failures are not fatal, and also that missed opportunities aren’t very damaging overall.

XRP, on the other hand, is only just starting to scale up its on-chain capital base; it has only $418 million in stablecoins. Furthermore, while it has succeeded in attracting some financial institutions to its chain, the truth is that its growth trajectory has not yet been seriously tested, and is still finding an appropriate product-market fit. Its real competitive challenges have only just begun.

So if you want a coin to buy with $5,000 and hold forever, pick the asset that can win without needing to be perfect: Ethereum. XRP is still a decent long-term hold, assuming it’s part of a diversified crypto portfolio, but it’s riskier.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Debate Brews Over Crypto Kiosks As Lawmakers Consider Potential Ban

Published

on

Debate Brews Over Crypto Kiosks As Lawmakers Consider Potential Ban

Lawmakers Consider Crypto ATM Ban as Scam Losses Rise — Including in Central Minnesota

Minnesota lawmakers are considering banning cryptocurrency kiosks as scam losses continue to rise across the state—including in Central Minnesota.

There are currently about 350 crypto kiosks operating statewide, located in places like gas stations, convenience stores, and grocery stores. These machines allow users to deposit cash and convert it into cryptocurrency, which can then be sent electronically.

Law enforcement officials say scammers are increasingly directing victims to use these kiosks because once the money is sent, it is extremely difficult—if not impossible—to recover.

Police say scams often begin with a phone call, text, or online message. In many cases, scammers pose as government officials, tech support workers, or even romantic partners. Victims are eventually told to withdraw cash and deposit it into a crypto kiosk to “protect” their money or resolve a supposed emergency.

Central Minnesota has seen similar cases. Because St. Cloud serves as a regional hub for shopping and services, crypto kiosks are available locally, giving scammers access points to target area residents.

Advertisement

Some say kiosks also serve legitimate users

Despite the concerns, crypto kiosks do offer legitimate benefits. They allow people to purchase cryptocurrency quickly using cash, without needing a traditional bank account, credit card, or online exchange. Supporters say this can make cryptocurrency more accessible, especially for people who prefer cash transactions or have limited access to banking services.

Crypto kiosks can also be used to send money quickly, including international transfers, without relying on traditional wire services. Some users view them as a convenient way to invest in cryptocurrency or move money electronically without going through a bank.

Companies that operate the machines say the vast majority of transactions are legitimate and that kiosks include warnings about scams. They argue the focus should be on stopping scammers, not banning the machines entirely.

Lawmakers weighing next steps

Supporters of the proposed ban say removing the kiosks could help prevent fraud and protect vulnerable residents, particularly older adults. Law enforcement officials told lawmakers that crypto kiosk scams have resulted in significant financial losses statewide.

Minnesota passed regulations in 2024 requiring some safeguards, including limits on deposits for new users and refund requirements in certain fraud cases. But officials say scammers have continued to adapt.

Advertisement

The bill remains under consideration at the Capitol.

In the meantime, authorities urge Central Minnesota residents to be cautious. Officials emphasize that legitimate government agencies, law enforcement, and businesses will never ask someone to deposit cash into a cryptocurrency kiosk.

As cryptocurrency becomes more common, lawmakers are now weighing whether the risks to consumers outweigh the convenience and accessibility these machines provide.

10 (More) Hilariously Bad Google Reviews of Central MN Landmarks

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud: Bizman loses Rs 2.6 cr to crypto, investment fraud | Hyderabad News – The Times of India

Published

on

Cryptocurrency Investment Fraud: Bizman loses Rs 2.6 cr to crypto, investment fraud | Hyderabad News – The Times of India

Hyderabad: A 69-year-old businessman from Somajiguda lost 2.65 crore allegedly in a cryptocurrency and stock investment fraud. Based on his complaint, Hyderabad Cyber Crime police have registered a case.The complainant was first contacted by a fraudster posing as Ramya Krishnan on Aug 30, 2025 through Facebook. She persuaded the victim to invest in a cryptocurrency and stock trading platform, Polyus Finance PFP Gold, hosted at the domain pfpgoldfx.vip, promising high returns to finance his proposed resort and apparel ventures.Fraudsters provided the victim a contact number for daily communication and sent screenshots showing notional profits credited in his wallet in USDT cryptocurrency. To build trust, the fraudster even allowed the victim a token withdrawal of 4,300 on Sept 12, 2025.Encouraged, the victim transferred over 2.65 crore in 10 transactions between Sept 10 and Dec 39, 2025 to various current accounts provided by the accused.When he attempted to withdraw his ‘earnings’, the accused demanded an additional 15% conversion commission. After he refused, the website became inaccessible and calls to the fraudsters went unanswered.Realising that he was duped, the victim filed an online report on the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal (NCRP) before approaching the Cyber Crime police on Feb 25.Based on his complaint, a case was registered under Sections 66C and 66D of the Information Technology Act and Sections 111(2)(b) (Organised crime), 318(4) (Cheating), 319(2) (Cheating by personation), 336(3) (Forgery for purpose of cheating), 338 (Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.) and 340(2) (Using as genuine a forged document or electronic record) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita on Wednesday. Police were analysing financial transactions to identify and arrest the accused.

Continue Reading

Trending