Digital Gold Rush: How Investment Scammers Exploit Zimbabwe’s Financial Frontier
Story By Mthandazo Nyoni
On August 18, 2025, the Zimbabwe Stock Exchange (ZSE) warned the public about Aaron Sibanda. He allegedly posed as a ZSE agent and solicited investments through EcoCash. His pitch was simple: invest US$30 and receive US$150 within 24 hours.
The ZSE quickly distanced itself from Sibanda. It stressed that it does not solicit investments directly. It urged the public to deal only with licensed stockbrokers and financial advisers.
The incident exposed a growing danger in Zimbabwe’s digital investment space. Fraudsters exploit the appetite for quick returns to fleece unsuspecting investors.
Their tactics vary. Some run WhatsApp groups that promise lucrative returns from Bitcoin mining. Others advertise dubious trading platforms on social media. The promise stays the same: invest a little and make a fortune.
The anatomy of a scam
Unemployment and currency uncertainty have left many Zimbabweans searching for other sources of income. Promises of quick, US dollar returns look especially attractive.
Cryptocurrencies and blockchain technology have legitimate applications. Fraudsters, however, use their complexity and popularity to disguise investment scams.
Their methods include fabricated testimonials, doctored screenshots of trading accounts and claims of guaranteed profits. They often collect payments through mobile money or personal accounts. That makes it hard for victims to recover their funds.
Victims who try to withdraw their money may face extra demands. Scammers describe these as taxes, processing fees or release fees.
Digital forensics and cyber fraud expert Cade Zvavanjanja said the problem was evolving faster than many regulatory systems could respond.
“Fraudsters innovate faster than regulations adapt. Cyber fraud isn’t just about technology, it’s about psychology, strategy, and resilience. The question isn’t if you will be targeted, but when,” Zvavanjanja said.
Technology is only part of the equation. Fraudsters also exploit trust, fear, greed and the pressure to decide quickly.
Not all digital investments are the same
Investors struggle most to tell legitimate digital assets, cryptocurrencies and outright fraud apart.
Cryptocurrency refers to digital assets such as Bitcoin. These assets use cryptographic technology and blockchain networks. Using crypto does not make an investment legitimate or fraudulent.
Better questions get to the heart of the offer. Who is making it? Under what authority? What do they sell? What economic activity should generate the return?
This matters most when promoters use cryptocurrency to market Ponzi or pyramid schemes. A Ponzi scheme typically promises attractive returns. It pays earlier investors with money from newer participants instead of profits from a genuine business. Pyramid schemes depend heavily on recruitment, and they link rewards to bringing others in.
Both can use cryptocurrency in their pitch. That does not make the underlying business legitimate.
A fraudulent scheme also differs from an unlicensed investment business. An operator can be unlicensed without running a Ponzi scheme. Still, operating outside the required regulatory framework leaves investors with fewer protections. It also makes it harder to establish who holds responsibility for their money.
Asset tokenisation is another use of digital technology. It uses digital tokens to represent rights or economic interests in identifiable real-world assets. When regulated market infrastructure offers these products under regulatory oversight, the token represents an interest in an underlying asset. It is not simply a promise of extraordinary returns.
The distinction matters because people increasingly use “crypto” as an umbrella term for very different activities.
Investors must look beyond whether an opportunity uses cryptocurrency or blockchain. They need to know what the operator sells and who sells it. They should check whether the operator has authorisation. They should also ask what asset or business generates the return and what protections exist if something goes wrong.
The social media pipeline
The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) has identified social media as an important channel for cryptocurrency activity in Zimbabwe.
In its 2024 Virtual Assets and Virtual Asset Service Providers risk assessment, the FIU said fraud spreads more easily without regulatory oversight. It added that the anonymity of cryptocurrency transactions helps fraudsters.
The report highlighted Telegram, WhatsApp and Facebook as platforms that facilitate peer-to-peer cryptocurrency transactions. The FIU identified more than 25 000 active Zimbabweans on social media platforms related to cryptocurrency trading.
These platforms let traders communicate directly. They can transact without relying on third-party platforms. That creates opportunities for legitimate trading, but it also exposes users to fraud.
At the 2025 Cyber Fraud Summit, cybersecurity enthusiast Pride Chaipah said Zimbabwe could not afford to ignore the digital transformation of finance.
“The future of finance is digital, and Zimbabwe must adapt or risk being left behind,” Chaipah said.
Digital finance is expanding, and so are the risks.
Nyarai’s nightmare
For Nyarai, the promise of digital finance ended in financial loss when her family needed money most.
Two years ago, her sister received a cancer diagnosis. Nyarai invested through a cryptocurrency company in central Harare. She hoped to raise money for medical bills and her child’s school fees.
Her first investment earned a ZiG3 000 profit, equivalent to about US$100. That encouraged her to put in more money. In August 2026, she invested ZiG15 000, worth about US$500.
“That was the beginning of a nightmare,” she recalls.
The company disappeared without paying its investors.
Nyarai asked to go by her middle name because she fears stigma. She appears to have fallen victim to a fraudulent cryptocurrency investment scheme.
Her experience illustrates a common tactic. A small initial payout builds credibility. Then the scammers persuade victims to commit far more money. By the time the operation disappears, the trust that brought investors in has become the means of defrauding them.
A costly lesson
Zimbabwe has seen substantial losses from pyramid schemes and other fraudulent investment operations. No single official figure shows the total lost specifically to cryptocurrency scams.
In 2021, police said at least 10 000 people had lost more than US$30 million to pyramid schemes. Those schemes collapsed over the preceding 12 months.
Police spokesperson Paul Nyathi said authorities had handled 892 cases involving thousands of complainants. Some victims reportedly sold houses and vehicles to finance their investments.
Among the schemes police named was Beven Capital. Police accused it of defrauding investors of US$17,8 million.
In 2023, thousands more Zimbabweans reportedly lost over US$5 million in another pyramid scheme. After it collapsed, the operators allegedly claimed they could not repay the funds because their “Bitcoin account had been locked”.
The FIU’s assessment gives another sign of the scale and nature of cryptocurrency-related fraud. It cited a case in which a well-known cryptocurrency dealer allegedly stole cryptocurrency worth US$108 000 from a complainant. The case is before the courts, and the High Court granted the accused bail.
The FIU noted a significant legal challenge. Zimbabwe has no specific legal framework for prosecuting cryptocurrency-related offences. To facilitate the investigation, the accused faces a fraud charge. The case uses the equivalent value of the cryptocurrency in US dollars.
Losses reach beyond mass-market schemes. In another case, a cryptocurrency dealer allegedly drained tokens from a Harare eye specialist’s digital wallets. The doctor lost US$457 000.
These cases show the range of digital investment fraud, from mass-market pyramid schemes to sophisticated theft involving large sums.
Regulation struggles to keep pace
Zimbabwe’s approach to cryptocurrency has evolved amid concerns about financial stability, consumer protection and money laundering.
In 2018, the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) ordered financial institutions to stop dealing in cryptocurrencies. It cited concerns about cryptocurrency exchange firm Bitfinance (Private) Limited, which it said lacked a licence from the monetary authorities. Bitfinance challenged the decision, and High Court judge Justice Alfas Chitakunye lifted the ban.
In 2020, ZSE Holdings chief executive Justin Bgoni told Business Times that the exchange was open to cryptocurrency listings on the foreign currency-denominated Victoria Falls Stock Exchange, subject to regulatory approval.
More recently, Zimbabwe introduced registration requirements for businesses involved in cryptocurrency-related activities. Under the new framework in the relevant Statutory Instrument, businesses that facilitate the buying, selling, transfer or storage of cryptocurrencies must register with the Financial Intelligence Unit. The annual registration fee is US$500.
The FIU’s findings point to a wider challenge. Regulation must keep pace with technological change and with the methods criminals use.
The problem is most acute when individuals transact directly, often through social media platforms. Regulators then have limited visibility, and victims have little recourse.
Asset tokenisation offers a different route
Amid the uncertainty around cryptocurrency, Zimbabwe’s capital markets are also experimenting with more tightly regulated forms of digital finance.
The Securities and Exchange Commission of Zimbabwe recently approved the Financial Securities Exchange (Finsec) to operate an Asset Tokenisation Market. Finsec will run it under the regulator’s sandbox framework.
Finsec chief executive Collen Tapfumaneyi said the approval would let assets such as property and livestock enter a regulated digital marketplace.
“The asset tokenisation allows us to bring real economic assets such as property and livestock into a regulated digital marketplace where they can be transparently issued, traded and settled, with strong investor protections in place,” he said.
The initiative attempts to extend digital technology into formal capital markets. Its success will depend on effective oversight and transparent disclosures. Investors must also understand the rights and risks attached to the products they buy.
Regulatory approval does not guarantee protection against investment losses.
Rebuilding investor confidence
The distinction between financial innovation and fraud matters more as digital investment products gain visibility.
Investors should verify the identity and regulatory status of any investment provider. They should check claims through official channels and understand how returns arise. They should avoid sending money to personal accounts based only on social media promotions.
The ZSE’s warning about Sibanda reminds us that scammers can borrow the names and credibility of established financial institutions. That makes their pitches look legitimate.
For Nyarai, the promise of quick profits ended in financial loss when her family needed money most. Her experience underlines the cost of investing without adequate verification.
As Zimbabwe develops its digital financial markets, the challenge is to widen investment opportunities without opening new avenues for fraud. Regulators, financial institutions and technology companies must keep pace with increasingly sophisticated scams.
Before sending money, investors can start with three basic questions: who is taking it, what exactly are they selling, and who regulates them?
Reporting based on original coverage by Zimbabwe Independent.
