Crypto Scams: An Interconnected, Multi-Billion-Dollar Fraud

Crypto scams have developed from isolated schemes into a billion-dollar global syndicate. In 2023 alone, victims in the US reported over $4.8 billion in cryptocurrency-related losses to the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3), a dramatic increase from previous years. IC3 also received crypto-related complaints from victims in more than 150 countries, underlining the global scale of these scams.

Yet the actual cost may be far higher; many victims never report their losses either due to embarrassment, confusion, or lack of knowledge needed to report these crimes.

What began with Ponzi schemes or fake initial coin offerings (ICOs) has now grown into a complex, global web of fraud. From rug pulls and AI-driven trading schemes to pig butchering and romance schemes, today’s crypto scams often operate as interconnected networks, sharing wallets, platforms, and even operators.

Platforms like Huione Guarantee, which help facilitate illicit online transactions, along with the viral spread of scams on social media, have become key tools in today’s crypto fraud schemes.

In this article, the WizCase research team examines the scale and structure of these scams, the primary targets, and how regulators worldwide are responding to this fast-developing threat landscape.

Crypto Scam Losses: How Much Has Been Lost?

As crypto use grows, isolated scams have developed into large-scale, transnational fraud networks. The organized crime groups operating these scams often run multiple frauds simultaneously, ranging from fake investments to financial grooming, while reusing the same infrastructure, laundering tools, and cross-platform promotions to maximize impact.

The global financial damage is significant. According to the 2025 Crypto Crime Report (Chainalysis), crypto crime-related losses in 2024 are estimated to have exceeded 51 billion USD, up from a currently calculated 40 billion USD, marking an 11.2% year-on-year increase.

The preceding graph shows financials from blockchain transactions. However, on-chain complaints filed with the FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) can provide a closer look at geographic victimization patterns, which we look at below.

In 2023, victims from the top 20 countries by estimated losses identified by IC3 reported a combined $5.6 billion in crypto-related losses, with the United States alone ing for over $4.8 billion.

While the US also led in complaint volume by a wide margin, countries like the Cayman Islands and Mexico reported significant losses despite fewer complaints.

This highlights not only the global spread of digital fraud networks, but also how certain countries and regions are targeted by crypto fraudsters due to vulnerabilities such as weak regulatory environment, financial secrecy laws, and economic factors.

Cyber criminals often exploit regions where legal protection and enforcement mechanisms are limited or less developed.

Scam Typology

As crypto adoption expands, so does the sophistication of scams related to it. Today’s fraud landscape has shifted from individual bad actors to coordinated operations run by professional hacking groups to AI-assisted fraud networks. The following table outlines the wide range of scam tactics currently in use.

In 2024, high-yield investment schemes and pig butchering schemes dominated, and were often combined with AI-generated deepfakes and personalized manipulation. Elderly s were particularly vulnerable to crypto ATM fraud, an offline extension of these online traps.

Meanwhile, North Korean hackers stole $1.34 billion through fake job apps, phishing, and insider access, including a $305 million theft from DMM Bitcoin. These stolen or scammed funds are often routed through Huione Guarantee, a China-linked platform believed to have processed over $70 billion in illicit crypto since 2021.

While ransomware earnings fell, public data leaks increased as more victims refused to pay.

This broader trend was reinforced by the California DFPI’s Scam Tracker database. Fraudulent trading platforms (326 reports) and pig butchering scams (228) were the most frequently reported incidents, followed by imposter (83) and romance scams (38).

The high number of reports suggest that tactics like social manipulation and impersonation are not isolated incidents but are part of a larger, coordinated fraud infrastructure. The interconnectedness between scam types often enabled by shared networks and platforms shows the growing professionalization of crypto fraud, where tactics evolve in real-time to developments across this ecosystem.

The Interconnected Scam Web

As seen in the wide range of scams reported, many of the scams follow a pattern similar to OneCoin, one of the largest and most infamous crypto scams. Run by Ruja Ignatova, also known as the “Cryptoqueen,” this scam became a prototype for modern crypto fraud.

From 2014 to 2017, OneCoin used fake coins, flashy selling tactics, and multi-level marketing schemes to promise huge profits to people who invested and brought in others. Through these tactics, the scam collected over $4 billion from victims in more than 175 countries.

Ruja disappeared in 2017, two weeks after a warrant was issued for her arrest by a US federal judge. But the methods she used still serve as a blueprint for other scammers, such as:

• Promising high returns with little risk
• Creating convincing websites
• Developing fake coins
• Using emotional targeting through social media and dating apps

What’s changed today is that these scams aren’t used separately. Along with new tools like AI, deepfakes, and fake crypto exchanges, many of the scams now share wallets, platforms, and money-laundering networks. This makes crypto scams more global, professional, and harder to trace.

Who Is Targeted and How?

Fraud affects every age group, but not equally. According to the Consumer Sentinel Network (CSN), older adults reported fewer scams yet lost much more money, highlighting both targeted exploitation and underreporting among the elderly.

In 2024, people aged 60–69 filed the highest number of reports and total losses ($1.18B). Those aged 70 and above submitted fewer complaints, but their median losses were far higher: $1,000 for ages 70–79 and $1,650 for those over 80.

By comparison, younger adults (20–39) filed over 30% of all fraud reports, but had lower median losses (averaging $417–$450). Teens reported the lowest total losses ($55M) but had the highest financial loss rate (51%), showing that even people with few assets are targeted and can fall prey to small yet frequent scams.

To reach victims, scammers use a variety of digital platforms. While email (25%), phone (19%), and text (16%) continue to be the most common method to commit frauds, the loss rate through social media (70%) and online/pop-up ads (62%) were surprisingly high. This means that even if there are fewer reported scams from these channels, they are more likely to result in financial loss.

When it comes to crypto scams, the tactics shift. Data from the DFPI Scam Tracker shows that crypto scammers prefer channels like WhatsApp (72 cases), Telegram (29), and dating apps (26). Other platforms like Instagram, Facebook, SMS, and even LinkedIn also played a role.

Once is made and victims invest, scammers often block access to the , demand money for fake taxes or commissions, or simply disappear (ghosting). In 266 out of 357 tracked cases, victims were never allowed to withdraw funds.

This pattern reveals that fraud methods are getting more personalized and scammers are adapting quickly by using everyday platforms and emotionally manipulative tactics to win trust.

The Road Ahead: Regulatory Actions and Security Measures

The anonymity and decentralized nature of crypto were once its greatest selling points, but have proved to also be its biggest liabilities. As crypto adoption grows, so too does the scale and complexity of related scams. Law enforcement agencies, often lacking crypto tracing expertise, continue to face challenges in identifying perpetrators and recovering stolen funds.

Despite these challenges, high-profile cases like BitConnect and FTX show how enforcement activity reflects meaningful progress. At the same time, the ongoing global search of Ruja Ignatova (the Cryptoqueen), while still unresolved, highlights the expanded operational scope and increasing international cooperation now being applied toward tackling crypto fraud.

To prevent such crimes, regulatory bodies and cybersecurity experts are pushing for protective policies like stronger KYC (Know Your Customer) compliance, predictive tools to flag potential scams early, and closer coordination between law enforcement, regulators, and crypto platforms to bridge enforcement gaps and rebuild trust in the crypto ecosystem.

Methodology

This article examines the financial impact, interconnected networks, and regulatory responses related to cryptocurrency scams, with a primary focus on the United States due to the availability of region-specific information and its rank as the most-targeted region.

Key data sources for the research include the 2025 Crypto Crime Report (Chainalysis), Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book 2024 (FTC), and the Crypto Scam Tracker (DFPI). Scams were first identified using keywords like rug pull and Ponzi scheme, and selected if they involved losses over 10 million USD and occurred between 2016–2024.

The Crypto Scam Tracker dataset was then mined for additional scam-related details like scam type, name, amount lost, timeline, actors involved, region, and resolution status based on -submitted complaints. Overall, a targeted extraction approach was used to manually compile key data from the two reports.

Key limitations include limited blockchain traceability, unreported cases, and legal complexities in cross-border cases. Despite these challenges, the methodology s a structured analysis of crypto fraud trends and regulatory enforcement gaps.

Discussion

In conclusion, the rapid growth of crypto scams underscores the urgent need for global cooperation and stricter regulations. The decentralized and anonymous nature of crypto scams has allowed scammers to operate undetected, making cross-border enforcement complex and often ineffective.

For victims, the consequences are both financial and emotional. As crypto use expands in 2025, potential victims — which includes anyone with a phone, access to the internet, and especially social media s — need to stay informed and recognize risks and potential red flags before making investments.

Moreover, the rise of platforms like Huione Guarantee and the use of AI-generated frauds highlight the growing sophistication and scale of these scams. Addressing this threat will require more than just enforcement; it needs a collaborative global approach, strong regulatory frameworks, improved consumer education, and proactive coordination between tech platforms, law enforcement, and financial institutions.