The 2024 Global Adoption Index: Central & Southern Asia and Oceania (CSAO) Region Leads the World in Terms of Global Cryptocurrency Adoption

This post is an excerpt from our 2024 Geography of Cryptocurrency Report. Download your copy now!

We are excited to share the fifth annual Chainalysis Global Crypto Adoption Index. In each year’s report, we look at both on- and off-chain data to determine which countries are leading the world in grassroots crypto adoption. Our research highlights countries where unique cryptocurrency use cases are taking hold, and explores why people in countries around the world are embracing crypto.

Keep reading to learn more about:

• Our methodology for the Global Crypto Adoption Index;
• Changes in this year’s methodology;
• The top 20 countries on our Global Crypto Adoption Index for 2024, and;
• Key takeaways from the index.

Our Global Crypto Adoption Index methodology

The Global Crypto Adoption Index is made up of four sub-indexes, each of which is based on countries’ usage of different types of cryptocurrency services. We rank all 151 countries for which we have sufficient data on each sub-index, weight the rankings by characteristics including population size and purchasing power, take the geometric mean of each country’s ranking in all four, and then normalize that final number on a scale of 0 to 1 to give every country a score that determines its overall ranking. The closer the country’s final score is to 1, the higher the rank.

In order to calculate our sub-indexes, we estimate countries’ transaction volumes for different types of cryptocurrency services and protocols based on the web traffic patterns of those services’ and protocols’ websites. We acknowledge that web traffic data are imperfect, as some crypto users likely employ VPNs and other similar tools to hide their true physical locations. However, given that our index accounts for hundreds of millions of cryptocurrency transactions and more than 13 billion web visits, it is likely that any misattributed transaction volume due to VPNs is marginal, given the size of the dataset. We also compare findings with insights from local crypto experts and operators around the world, giving us more confidence in this methodology.

Below are descriptions of the sub-indexes and how they are calculated, as well as improvements in our methodology since last year.

Sub-index category 1: on-chain cryptocurrency value received by centralized services, weighted by GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis 

We include this sub-index to rank each country by total cryptocurrency value received on centralized services, and weight the rankings to favor countries where that amount is more significant in comparison to the average person’s income in that country. To calculate this, we estimate the total value received on-chain by users of centralized services in each country, and weight that by GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis, which measures the country’s income per resident. The higher the ratio of on-chain value received to GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis, the higher the ranking. In other words, if two countries received equal amounts of cryptocurrency at centralized services, the country with lower weighted GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis would rank ahead.

Sub-index category 2: on-chain retail cryptocurrency value received by centralized services, weighted by GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis

We also estimate the activity of non-professional, individual cryptocurrency users at centralized services, based on the value of crypto they’re transacting compared to the average person’s purchasing power. We do this by estimating the amount of crypto received at centralized services by users in each country — similar to sub-index category 1 — but only counting value received in retail-sized transactions, which we designate as transactions under $10,000 worth of crypto. We then rank each country according to this metric, but weight it to favor countries with a lower GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis.

Sub-index category 3: on-chain cryptocurrency value received by DeFi protocols, weighted by GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis

We rank countries by their DeFi transaction volume and weight the rankings to favor countries with lower GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis.

Sub-index category 4: on-chain retail cryptocurrency value received by DeFi protocols, weighted by GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis  

We rank each country by DeFi transaction volume carried out in retail-sized transfers (again, under $10,000 worth of crypto), weighted to favor countries with lower GDP per capita on a PPP adjusted basis.

Methodology changes

Methodology change 1: measuring DeFi activity

The primary change in this year’s methodology pertains to how we measured cryptocurrency value received by decentralized protocols. For DeFi services, we included only the value received from suspected personal wallets and excluded the value received by other known DeFi wallets. This new methodology ensures that the total value received is not inflated due to the intermediary steps required by certain smart contracts.

Here’s an example of how DeFi transfers typically work:

1. A personal wallet initiates a swap in DeFi Protocol A, transferring Ether (ETH) from the personal wallet to DeFi Protocol A’s Router contract address.
2. ETH is deposited to the wrapped Ether (wETH) token contract address from the Router contract address.
3. The Router contract address receives wETH.
4. A transfer ensues from the Router to the decentralized exchange (DEX) pool contract.
5. A transfer ensues from the DEX pool contract to the Router.
6. There is a final transfer from the Router back to the personal wallet.

Based on our new methodology, we are only counting the first transfer in the above example to determine the total value received by the DeFi protocol. By doing this, we can eliminate intermediary transfers between contracts that belong to the same service provider. This process led to a decrease in our estimates of value received, but is now a more accurate estimate.

Methodology change 2: excluding P2P exchange sub-index 

In previous years, we included P2P cryptocurrency exchange trade volume, weighted by PPP per capita and number of internet users, to calculate overall Global Crypto Adoption rankings. This year, we have decided to exclude this sub-index due to a substantial decrease in activity on P2P exchanges. One of the largest and the most tenured P2P exchange, LocalBitcoins.com, shut down last year, which contributed to this decline.

The 2024 Global Crypto Adoption Index Top 20

Central & Southern Asia and Oceania (CSAO) dominates our 2024 Index, with seven of the top 20 countries located in the region. As we explore in the full report, CSAO has a unique set of crypto markets with high levels of activity on local crypto exchanges, with merchant services, and in DeFi.

Country	Region	Overall index ranking	Centralized service value received ranking	Retail centralized service value received ranking	DeFi value received ranking	Retail DeFi value received ranking
India	CSAO	1	1	1	3	2
Nigeria	Sub-Saharan Africa	2	5	2	2	3
Indonesia	CSAO	3	6	6	1	1
United States	North America	4	2	12	4	4
Vietnam	CSAO	5	3	3	6	5
Ukraine	Eastern Europe	6	7	5	5	6
Russia	Eastern Europe	7	11	7	7	7
Philippines	CSAO	8	9	8	14	9
Pakistan	CSAO	9	4	4	18	13
Brazil	LATAM	10	8	10	10	14
Türkiye	Middle East & North Africa	11	14	11	15	11
United Kingdom	Central, Northern & Western Europe	12	12	21	9	8
Venezuela	LATAM	13	17	16	11	12
Mexico	LATAM	14	18	17	13	10
Argentina	LATAM	15	13	13	17	20
Thailand	CSAO	16	16	15	19	16
Cambodia	CSAO	17	10	9	35	23
Canada	North America	18	22	26	16	15
South Korea	Eastern Asia	19	15	14	33	33
China	Eastern Asia	20	20	18	24	22

Global crypto activity is increasing 

Between the fourth quarter of 2023 and the first quarter of 2024, the total value of global crypto activity increased substantially, reaching higher levels than those of 2021 during the crypto bull market. We can see this pattern in the chart below, where we apply our Adoption Index methodology globally by adding all 151 countries’ index scores for each quarter from Q3 2021 to Q2 2024, and re-indexing them again to show global adoption growth over time.

Last year, growth in crypto adoption was driven primarily by lower-middle income countries. This year, however, crypto activity increased across countries of all income brackets, with a pullback in high income countries since the beginning of 2024.

The launch of the Bitcoin ETF in the United States triggered an increase in total value of Bitcoin activity across all regions, with particularly strong year-over-year growth in institutional-sized transfers and in regions with higher income countries, such as North America and Western Europe. On the contrary, year-over-year growth of stablecoins was higher among retail and professional-sized transfers, and is supporting real-world use cases in low income and lower-middle income countries in regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa and Latin America, in particular.

 

When we look at year-over-year growth in terms of types of services, we see that DeFi activity increased significantly in Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Eastern Europe. This growth likely drove an increase in altcoin activity in these regions, as shown in the above chart.

Read our full 2024 Geography of Cryptocurrency Report for more information about these trends, recent regulatory developments, and how countries around the world are using crypto.

This website contains links to third-party sites that are not under the control of Chainalysis, Inc. or its affiliates (collectively “Chainalysis”). Access to such information does not imply association with, endorsement of, approval of, or recommendation by Chainalysis of the site or its operators, and Chainalysis is not responsible for the products, services, or other content hosted therein.

This material is for informational purposes only, and is not intended to provide legal, tax, financial, or investment advice. Recipients should consult their own advisors before making these types of decisions. Chainalysis has no responsibility or liability for any decision made or any other acts or omissions in connection with Recipient’s use of this material.
Chainalysis does not guarantee or warrant the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, suitability or validity of the information in this report and will not be responsible for any claim attributable to errors, omissions, or other inaccuracies of any part of such material.