top of page

What People Really Think about Cryptocurrency

What People Really Think about Cryptocurrency


ree

A decade after Bitcoin’s debut, cryptocurrency has moved from a fringe experiment to a mainstream topic in finance and technology. Yet public opinion remains divided. For some, it represents innovation and independence; for others, speculation and risk. A large-scale survey of nearly 4,000 German adults helps explain why this divide persists—and what it reveals about how people understand and engage with emerging financial technologies.

The results show a market driven as much by perception and ideology as by economics. Awareness is high, but comprehension is uneven. Trust, knowledge, and belief intersect to shape participation. For leaders navigating digital finance, the findings highlight a new kind of market dynamic—one where emotion, conviction, and social meaning are as influential as returns.

Awareness is high, understanding is not

In the survey, 83 percent of respondents had heard of cryptocurrency. Yet when asked to rate their own understanding on a ten-point scale, the average score was less than four. Awareness, in other words, far outpaces knowledge.

That imbalance matters. People who describe themselves as more knowledgeable are several times more likely to own cryptocurrency than those who do not. Knowledge and trust move together: individuals who understand blockchain technology tend to view cryptocurrencies as more legitimate, and that confidence increases the likelihood of ownership.

This connection creates a reinforcing cycle. Experience deepens understanding; understanding fosters trust; and trust encourages continued engagement. For policymakers and firms, it suggests that education is not just a social good—it is a market driver.

Who owns crypto—and who doesn’t

Roughly nine percent of German internet users currently own cryptocurrency, with another nine percent having owned it in the past. These rates are comparable to national stock ownership, signaling that crypto has reached a level of societal relevance beyond speculation.

Still, participation is far from universal. Owners tend to be younger, more likely male, and better educated than non-owners. The typical holder is in their late thirties, earns above-average income, and often works in a technical or professional role. Among non-owners, familiarity and comfort with financial technology are lower.

This demographic pattern mirrors the diffusion curve of many innovations: early adopters are affluent and tech-oriented, while later adoption depends on usability, education, and institutional trust. For businesses and regulators, understanding who participates—and who remains on the sidelines—provides a foundation for designing more inclusive financial systems.

Perception defines legitimacy

The study reveals that perception—not only performance—shapes engagement. For many people, cryptocurrency’s image remains polarized. Non-owners often associate it with risk, speculation, or illegal activity. Owners see it as an innovative and transparent system that enables autonomy and opportunity.

This divergence between perceived and actual use is striking. When asked what they believe crypto is used for, non-owners most often cite criminal acts, money concealment, and speculation. In reality, owners report using it mainly for investment, payments, and access to digital services.

Such misalignment shows that cryptocurrency functions as a symbol as much as a tool. Its perceived legitimacy depends less on technical performance than on how narratives about it circulate through media and social networks. Perception becomes a kind of market variable: when confidence rises, so does activity; when it falls, participation slows.

For financial institutions and policymakers, this means that communication and transparency are as critical as regulation. Addressing misinformation and clarifying legitimate use cases may be more effective at building trust than promoting innovation alone.

Ideology as motivation

Perhaps the most distinctive finding of the study is the role of ideology. Sixty-two percent of current owners said their decision to hold cryptocurrency was at least partly ideological.

In this context, ideology does not refer narrowly to politics but to values and worldview. Owners frequently describe crypto as an expression of financial independence, technological optimism, and skepticism toward centralized authority. Some view it as a way to separate money from government or to participate in a more open digital economy. Others are drawn by the promise of transparency and autonomy.

These beliefs shape behavior. Ideological owners tend to hold their assets longer, remain engaged during downturns, and participate in online communities that reinforce their views. For them, owning crypto is as much about belonging to a movement as managing an investment.

For business leaders, this presents a nuanced challenge. Strategies focused solely on returns or convenience may miss the emotional and symbolic dimensions that drive loyalty. Brands that engage with the crypto ecosystem—whether through payments, partnerships, or communication—should recognize that for many participants, cryptocurrency represents identity and principle, not just price.

Trust and education as twin catalysts

Across all groups, trust in cryptocurrency remains moderate. On average, respondents rated it below four on a ten-point scale. But among current owners, the average score jumps to nearly seven. Trust grows with knowledge and experience.

This pattern creates both opportunity and risk. Those who know little tend to distrust crypto entirely, while those who use it may overestimate their understanding and downplay risk. For regulators and companies, the task is to balance empowerment with protection—building confidence without encouraging overexposure.

Education, transparency, and responsible design are key. Platforms that explain technology clearly, disclose risks, and provide user safeguards can convert curiosity into informed participation. In markets defined by newness and complexity, trust is not given; it is engineered.

The social economy of digital finance

The findings highlight that cryptocurrency operates within a social economy as much as a financial one. Awareness spreads through networks; trust grows through shared narratives; and ideology gives meaning to participation.

This social dimension explains why cryptocurrency can rally global attention despite limited usage in daily transactions. It also clarifies why regulation, marketing, and innovation cannot be separated from communication and education.

In that sense, crypto is a preview of how future financial technologies will diffuse—through a blend of technical capability, collective belief, and cultural resonance. For executives navigating digital transformation, understanding these human dynamics is now as important as mastering the technology itself.

What leaders can take away

Three lessons stand out for decision-makers:

First, perception is strategic capital. How people see an innovation shapes whether they adopt it. Managing perception through clarity, transparency, and credible information can be as powerful as managing performance metrics.

Second, ideology sustains engagement. While markets fluctuate, values endure. Recognizing the motivations behind participation—autonomy, distrust, innovation—helps leaders communicate authentically and anticipate user loyalty or resistance.

Third, knowledge and trust move markets. Education is not a soft policy goal but a competitive advantage. Firms and regulators that invest in public understanding will shape not only adoption rates but also the stability and reputation of the broader digital finance ecosystem.

A market still defined by meaning

Cryptocurrency is more than an asset class. It is a mirror reflecting how people perceive technology, authority, and risk in the digital age. Awareness is widespread, but confidence is uneven. Ownership concentrates among those who combine curiosity with conviction.

The next phase of the crypto economy will depend less on volatility and more on understanding—of both the technology and the values surrounding it. As financial innovation accelerates, the lesson is clear: in markets built on trust and transparency, perception and ideology are not distractions from economics. They are part of it.


Original article: Steinmetz, F., von Meduna, M., Ante, L., & Fiedler, I. (2021). Ownership, uses and perceptions of cryptocurrency: Results from a population survey. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 173, 121073. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121073


Disclaimer: The content on this website is for marketing innovation and education purposes only and should not be considered investment advice.


Follow us

ree

Comments

bottom of page