ZiG accounted for about 43 percent of Zimbabwe’s transactions in September 2026, according to the latest Reserve Bank figure. Read that number on its own and it looks simple enough, but the history behind it is anything but flat.
The local currency started from a much smaller base after its April 2024 launch. Its share of electronic transactions in the National Payment System was reported at 26 percent that month, later reached 43 percent in May 2025, spent much of 2025 around the 35 to 40 percent range, and peaked near 45 percent again in May 2026.
Seasonality matters more than the headline usually admits. ZiG reached roughly 45 percent of transactions in May 2026 during the agricultural marketing season, when local-currency demand rose around crop payments and related spending, then settled back into a lower range afterward.
Transaction costs can move the share too. Lower bank charges, reduced payment fees and tax changes can make ZiG cheaper to move through formal channels, while easier ATM access can push more local notes into circulation and give people another reason to use the currency for ordinary purchases.
None of this means a monthly rise automatically equals a permanent jump in confidence. Payment behavior reacts to practical stuff quickly, so a strong month can reflect a temporary burst of local-currency demand without telling you much about what households or businesses plan to hold six months later.
Zimbabwe’s National Payment System reports value and volume separately for a reason. RTGS transfers, point-of-sale payments, mobile money, ATM activity and internet payments do not behave the same way, and changes in the mix between those channels can move the headline percentage even when individual habits barely change.
There is another wrinkle buried in the reporting. Consolidated payment-system tables can convert US-dollar transactions into ZiG at the prevailing interbank rate for accounting purposes, so a table expressed in ZiG is not evidence that every transaction in the table was actually settled in ZiG.
This is where casual comparisons get messy. One report might describe the local-currency share of electronic transactions, another may discuss settlement value, and a third may use a broader measure of usage gathered from administrative data or surveys. Similar-looking percentages can be measuring slightly different things.
The confusion showed up in 2025 reporting. One official midyear statement described electronic ZiG usage at more than 40 percent in June, while other reporting around the same period placed the share lower after a 43 percent May peak. Without matching the date, denominator and payment category, treating those figures as a clean month-by-month series is shaky.
Zimbabwe has lived with deep currency substitution for years, which makes the distinction important. Dollarization in Zimbabwe’s monetary history helps explain why the currency used to settle a purchase and the currency people prefer to store value in are not automatically the same thing.
A business can accept ZiG from customers in the morning and still prefer US dollars for imported stock later in the week. A farmer can receive a local-currency payment during the marketing season without turning that temporary inflow into a long-term ZiG deposit.
Banks face the same split from another angle. More local-currency transactions can increase the amount of ZiG moving through payment rails without creating the stable, long-duration deposits needed to support more lending. Money can circulate quickly and still refuse to sit still.
So the changing ZiG percentage is useful, just narrower than the headline makes it sound. The cleanest reading is to ask three things each time a new number appears, namely the month being measured, whether the figure refers to value or volume, and which payment channels sit inside the calculation.
September’s roughly 43 percent figure therefore does not cancel the 45 percent May peak or the lower ranges reported earlier. It says the local currency remains a large part of formal payments, while the exact share continues to move with seasons, costs, cash availability and the way each dataset defines the transactions being counted.
The local currency started from a much smaller base after its April 2024 launch. Its share of electronic transactions in the National Payment System was reported at 26 percent that month, later reached 43 percent in May 2025, spent much of 2025 around the 35 to 40 percent range, and peaked near 45 percent again in May 2026.
Zimbabwe’s payment mix has been moving since ZiG launched
A percentage such as ZiG’s 43 percent transaction share is best read as a dated snapshot of the payment mix, not a permanent level. People switch between ZiG and foreign currency depending on what they are buying, how they are paying, whether local cash is available, and which currency a seller is willing to accept.Seasonality matters more than the headline usually admits. ZiG reached roughly 45 percent of transactions in May 2026 during the agricultural marketing season, when local-currency demand rose around crop payments and related spending, then settled back into a lower range afterward.
Transaction costs can move the share too. Lower bank charges, reduced payment fees and tax changes can make ZiG cheaper to move through formal channels, while easier ATM access can push more local notes into circulation and give people another reason to use the currency for ordinary purchases.
None of this means a monthly rise automatically equals a permanent jump in confidence. Payment behavior reacts to practical stuff quickly, so a strong month can reflect a temporary burst of local-currency demand without telling you much about what households or businesses plan to hold six months later.
One percentage can hide a messy payment mix
The first trap is confusing transaction value with transaction count. A currency can make up a large share of payments by value because a smaller number of expensive transfers run through it, while another currency still dominates the number of everyday purchases.Zimbabwe’s National Payment System reports value and volume separately for a reason. RTGS transfers, point-of-sale payments, mobile money, ATM activity and internet payments do not behave the same way, and changes in the mix between those channels can move the headline percentage even when individual habits barely change.
There is another wrinkle buried in the reporting. Consolidated payment-system tables can convert US-dollar transactions into ZiG at the prevailing interbank rate for accounting purposes, so a table expressed in ZiG is not evidence that every transaction in the table was actually settled in ZiG.
This is where casual comparisons get messy. One report might describe the local-currency share of electronic transactions, another may discuss settlement value, and a third may use a broader measure of usage gathered from administrative data or surveys. Similar-looking percentages can be measuring slightly different things.
The confusion showed up in 2025 reporting. One official midyear statement described electronic ZiG usage at more than 40 percent in June, while other reporting around the same period placed the share lower after a 43 percent May peak. Without matching the date, denominator and payment category, treating those figures as a clean month-by-month series is shaky.
ZiG usage and willingness to hold ZiG are different things
A transaction-share figure tells you what people used to pay. It does not tell you how much ZiG they keep in bank accounts, how long they keep it, how much lending is denominated in it, or how much foreign currency remains in savings and business balance sheets.Zimbabwe has lived with deep currency substitution for years, which makes the distinction important. Dollarization in Zimbabwe’s monetary history helps explain why the currency used to settle a purchase and the currency people prefer to store value in are not automatically the same thing.
A business can accept ZiG from customers in the morning and still prefer US dollars for imported stock later in the week. A farmer can receive a local-currency payment during the marketing season without turning that temporary inflow into a long-term ZiG deposit.
Banks face the same split from another angle. More local-currency transactions can increase the amount of ZiG moving through payment rails without creating the stable, long-duration deposits needed to support more lending. Money can circulate quickly and still refuse to sit still.
So the changing ZiG percentage is useful, just narrower than the headline makes it sound. The cleanest reading is to ask three things each time a new number appears, namely the month being measured, whether the figure refers to value or volume, and which payment channels sit inside the calculation.
September’s roughly 43 percent figure therefore does not cancel the 45 percent May peak or the lower ranges reported earlier. It says the local currency remains a large part of formal payments, while the exact share continues to move with seasons, costs, cash availability and the way each dataset defines the transactions being counted.
