Rome is one of the most prepared cities for cryptocurrency

Rome is one of the most cryptocurrency-friendly cities in the world, according to a recent CoinWire study.

The study is titled “Most Crypto-Ready Cities in 2024” and was conducted to answer the questions of which cities offer the greatest trading and investment opportunities and the highest enthusiasm for cryptocurrencies.

Rome Cryptocurrency-ready city: A city ready to fully embrace cryptocurrencies

Rome is not the highest scoring city, but with a score of 85.85 out of 100, it is one of the best cities for cryptocurrency, along with Los Angeles and Singapore.

Considering the overall ranking of the Crypto Ready Score, Rome ranks 29th and Florence ranks 44th. Interestingly, this ranking does not take into account Italy’s second largest city, Milan (Florence is only eighth). Instead, cities such as Dubrovnik in Croatia and Bucharest in Romania were considered.

In particular, Rome received the highest score (100 points) in the legal aspect and a very high score (97.14) in the corporate aspect.

The employment score was clearly high at 94.09, and the remaining scores were all low or very low. In fact, it got 0.77 for ATMs and 0 for cryptocurrency acceptance.

In light of this data, it is somewhat difficult to understand why it scored 85.85 as the most cryptocurrency-ready city, especially since its cryptocurrency readiness score is just above 55.

Florence

The only Italian city considered was Florence rather than Milan.

Florence received an overall score of 54 points, slightly lower than Rome. For Florence, the highest score (100) is also related to legal issues, probably because a new special law on the handling of cryptocurrencies came into effect in Italy in 2023 and MiCA will come into force in 2024. It is enforceable throughout the European Union.

However, compared to Rome, Florence has a lower Enterprise Score (80) and a higher Employment Score (88).

However, Florence’s approval score is also 0, and for ATMs it is only 0.17.

New York

The ranking is led by New York City.

New York’s Crypto Ready score is 85.85 and its legal score is 100. Even this last piece of data sounds a little strange, since neither New York State nor the United States has specific laws regulating cryptocurrencies yet.

But New York boasts two other perfect scores. In fact, it also received 100 points in cryptocurrency acceptance and employment scores.

Ironically, New York’s lowest score is for businesses (34.29), which also surpasses ATM (45.14).

another city

London ranked second in this ranking with 75 points, followed by Los Angeles with 73 points.

Sydney ranked 4th, and Singapore, Asia’s first city, ranked 5th.

The top city in Africa was Cape Town in 11th place, and the top city in Latin America was Guadalajara, Mexico in 17th place.

They performed better than Rome Bogota, Colombia, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam and even Christchurch, New Zealand.

The city with the lowest score among the cities considered turned out to be Tokyo, with a score of 52.84, despite ironically Japan being the first country in the world to accept cryptocurrency payments.

On the other hand, Los Angeles had the highest number of cryptocurrency ATMs (1810).

Cryptocurrency adoption beyond the city of Rome

To be honest, this data looks a little odd, especially as it relates to cities outside of North America.

For example, this ranking does not include Swiss cities, nor does it include Lugano, where many merchants currently generally accept cryptocurrencies.

There is not even a city in the United Arab Emirates like Dubai, or, above all, the capital of El Salvador, where Bitcoin is the fiat currency.

Given these shortcomings, the CoinWire report cannot be considered a reference point to have a complete picture of global cryptocurrency adoption.

Additionally, the report only analyzes individual cities. That is, it focuses on a specific environment. This may be because this was its purpose.

In fact, other rankings that break this data down by country rather than city provide different results. Because at a more concrete level, there are very different realities. Therefore, at the national level, internal differences often appear to be: In particular, they do not provide representative results.