How Entrepreneurs and Creators are Shaping Their Own Brands Without Design Degrees

With design tools more accessible than ever, a new breed of entrepreneurs are skipping the formalities of learning graphic design and teaching themselves. From content creators to solopreneurs, self-taught designers are building their businesses and brands from scratch, one social post at a time.

A new report from Adobe Express illustrates how this DIY design revolution is changing the face of small businesses. Based on a survey of 454 U.S. entrepreneurs and creators, the report tells how those with no formal design training are handling their branding tasks, often learning on the fly, with the assistance of AI tools and putting in hours of extra work to have professional looking content.

Getting the Job Done Without the Financial Blanket

Nearly 6 out of 10 (58%) said they do all their own designing. This includes their logos, graphics for their sites, and social posts. They handle all aspects of their branding work by themselves, often with little budget and no design knowledge.

Their two main means of learning? Trial and error (64%) and YouTube (54%). Only 16% indicated they had any formal design education. Don't slight TikTok, though. 1 in 4 turn to this platform for design tips.

Completing all of their own work, this group is highly dedicated, both time-wise and financially. Entrepreneurs are spending an average of $249 per year on design tools, while over 1 in 5 spend more than $1,000. Also, nearly 10 hours per week are spent on designing, with half stating that this time involved is the biggest obstacle of the whole process.

The amount of success that comes from these creators is especially impressive due to the amount of time, money, and lack of formal training that's involved. They often work outside regular working hours to get their branding efforts where they want them to be. Most often, they’re juggling day jobs, client work and personal obligations. For many, it’s not about the money, it’s about holding on to the creative vision and for them breaking those boundaries to establish something that feels authentic. This means each design choice, from font changes to color palette selections, is done from a personal perspective, based on what they think is good.

Design Burnout, Meet Imposter Syndrome!

The greatest barriers to success aren’t always technical; some are psychological. Many non-designers say they have problems with confidence in their images. Almost 1 in 5 (19%) confirm that their confidence is shaky regarding the quality of their brand assets. Over 50% have put off launches and posts because they did not appear polished enough to them.

What would help? A greater grasp of design (41%), more time (37%), and better quality templates (33%). The lack of confidence is compounded even with the growing popularity of AI tools. 71% say they use AI tools to help them create. 48% of them confirm they are feeling confident with their designs compared to the 42% who are not using AI.

Self-doubt is more than just a botheration; it has serious business consequences. 20% of respondents confirm they have received negative comments pertaining to their visuals. About a quarter admit they have copied or made substantial use of other brands styles.

It's very easy to think you should just do what others are doing when they seem successful, especially with so many design ideas going around. Doing this will generally cause what we call brand dilution. It's much better for entrepreneurs and creators to take their own personalized road, separating themselves from everyone else to show authenticity. Even when things aren't produced perfectly, it's better than copying everything you see. It almost always brings in more attention than a basic cliche template.

Time Dedication and Pressure to Keep Up

Creating visual content is not a one-time task, it’s a big weekly responsibility. Respondents report they spend the most time designing for TikTok (an average of 9 hours a week). Instagram is next with 8 hours, followed by business web pages and Etsy shops with 6 hours.

Spending this amount of time on content sometimes leads to endless revision. More than half of the respondents revise their graphics once or twice before posting. 15% report making three to five revisions, while 11% revise widely enough to lose track of the number.

For many, the solution is recycling. Nearly 3 in 4 respondents report using earlier content for new visual products. Others dream of outsourcing, with web design, video editing, and brand identity at the top of the list if budget weren’t a factor.

Even so, creators are working out their own shortcuts and routines for handling the pressure. Some batch content, some use templates and drag-and-drop tools to maintain consistency. The emergence of apps that help to resize, animate, and publish across channels has alleviated some of the pain. The pressure to remain visible and relevant is nevertheless high on fast-moving platforms such as TikTok.

Making DIY Design Work

Although they often face challenges, many creators feel good about their finished products. 79% say their branding work has enhanced the way in which their business is perceived for credibility. 16% even report that people have confused their brands with businesses that are larger or more established.

Instagram remains the best-performing platform for visuals, followed by Facebook, business websites and TikTok. 40% confess to being afflicted with a feeling of perfectionism, 35% say they suffered from stress, and 30% have confessed that they are subject to indecision. Imposter syndrome still hangs on for 19%. It is not all just stress and burnout, though. Almost half (49%) of creators have reported that designing is satisfying and a creative outlet for them.

Nevertheless, the ability to create visuals that register, without relying on others to help to get them, is a proud point. Many of these creators refer to this as a milestone in their growth. Each iteration and revision, or simply a design incident, inspires the creator to greater fluency in visual storytelling. Even though we live in a digital world that’s saturated with content, a brand’s biggest asset can be authenticity.

The New Approach to Branding

DIY branding offers something different and bigger. It constitutes a movement. While non-designers find it difficult still to become masters of instruments in the process of design, many have proved that creativity in combination with persistence and resourcefulness, does go a long way.

For the small businessman, the side hustler, or the creator who is starting from scratch, branding has become another skill in the toolbox. It is less a matter of polish and more about progress. As AI tools, platforms and learning resources continue to expand, so will the confidence and capabilities of these creators.

Read next:

• Gen Z Won't Wait Around for Bad Onboarding

• AI’s Limits Exposed: New Study Finds Machines Struggle With Real Remote Work

• How Social Media Loyalty Loops Make Us Copy the Worst Behavior from Our Own Group
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

Router Neglect: How a Simple Setting Puts Millions at Risk

A new study has revealed that millions of home internet users could be leaving their routers open to cyberattacks simply because they never change the default settings.

The research, carried out by Broadband Genie with technical input from McAfee, found that a large share of households continue to overlook one of the most basic forms of digital protection.

The survey gathered responses from more than 3,200 participants, analysing their habits and awareness of home network security. Although the findings show small improvements since 2024, they paint a picture of widespread complacency around router configuration. Nearly half of all users, around 47 percent, have never adjusted any of their factory settings. For a country with roughly 28 million broadband connections, that amounts to nearly 12.7 million routers still using default options that could be exploited by attackers.

Router settings are often left untouched for years after installation. The study showed that 81 percent of users have not changed their administrator passwords, and 85 percent continue to use the network names set by manufacturers. Almost seven in ten have never replaced their Wi-Fi passwords, and 84 percent have never updated their router’s firmware. While each of these figures has improved slightly from previous years, the overall trend suggests a slow pace of change.

Many users simply do not understand why router adjustments matter. Nearly three quarters of respondents said they saw no reason to change the default settings, and about a fifth admitted they did not know how to make those changes. This awareness gap is most visible among older participants. More than six in ten of those aged 65 or above said they had never opened their router’s settings, compared with less than a third among 18 to 24-year-olds. Even so, younger groups were far from fully secure.

The lack of attention to router configuration leaves an easy pathway for criminals. Devices that run on factory credentials can be accessed remotely, giving intruders the chance to read network traffic, intercept data or spread malicious software across connected devices. A single compromised router can expose personal files, home surveillance feeds, and even financial transactions. Despite growing awareness of cybersecurity risks, home routers remain one of the least protected points in the network chain.

Experts note that a few small adjustments are often enough to block these threats. Changing the administrator password and Wi-Fi key are the most effective first steps. Renaming the network adds another layer of difficulty for anyone attempting to identify the router model and exploit its known weaknesses. Regular firmware updates, meanwhile, close vulnerabilities that hackers may try to use. Many newer routers now install updates automatically, but older ones still depend on manual checks from users.

The figures collected by Broadband Genie also reflect a slow shift in attitudes. The share of users who changed their router settings rose by five percentage points compared with 2024, but that still leaves millions exposed. Firmware updates, which play a key role in preventing attacks, remain neglected despite years of public awareness campaigns. Most users continue to focus on software or mobile security, rarely considering that the router is their main entry point to the internet.

While users bear responsibility for their own security, the report points out that providers and manufacturers could make the process easier. Many routers are shipped with complex interfaces or generic instructions that discourage engagement. Simplifying these menus and sending clearer reminders could help users apply stronger settings without needing technical knowledge. Security measures could also be prompted during setup, much like operating systems require password creation on first use.

The study underlines how cybersecurity is no longer limited to experts or large companies. Every household network forms part of the wider digital environment, and a weak link in one home can affect others through compromised devices or data leaks. Taking a few minutes to update a router’s settings is not only a matter of personal protection but a contribution to broader online safety.

The 2025 results suggest the consumers are moving in the right direction, but progress remains slow. With more connected devices entering homes each year, the router continues to act as a digital front door. Keeping it secure requires awareness, routine updates, and small habits that, over time, close off easy routes for cybercriminals. For most people, the simplest step, changing a default password, remains the one that could make the biggest difference.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools. 

Read next: New Study Shows Which Countries Use VPN Most and Least
by Asim BN via Digital Information World

Gen Z Won't Wait Around for Bad Onboarding

First days at work should be thrilling. But for the majority of Gen Z new hires in recent years, that inaugural week is a warning sign rather.

The latest SoftwareFinder poll queried over 500 Gen Z workers who started new positions in the previous two years. What did they discover? Nearly 1 in 5 ghosted throughout training. Another 22% had considered peacing out prematurely, and 8% actually left within their initial three months.

That ain't turnover. That's exit-running on a grand scale.

Off to a Bizarre Start

First impressions matter. And Gen Z isn't making them. They were most commonly reported to feel confused, disoriented, and as if an afterthought when getting onboarded. More than half did not even feel invited to ask basic questions, like who to talk to, or how policies were being implemented.

One described it as such: "It was like I went to a party that nobody invited me to."

They turned to the internet instead of direct guidance. 77% said they had to Google not-a-covered onboarding problem. 35% said they visited ChatGPT instead of their real manager. Not good.

And it's not a matter of getting the fix to some technical glitch or HR process. It's a trend. If new hires are left to figure out the basics, they start to doubt whether the company is not ready for them, or worse, is not interested.

Not Asking for Much

The vast majority of Gen Z hires aren't asking to be babysat. They just need:

• Clear pay information (90% said that does make a difference)
• Transparency of remote/hybrid policy (74% would prefer upfront)
• Sane career path (66%)
• Actual mental health care (60%)
• More than lip service DEI practices (54%)

Not too much to ask. Nobody's asking for meditation pods or catered lunches. Just truth and direction.

And that word, direction, is called upon a great deal. The majority of the study subjects said they had no way of knowing what their first week was going to be like. No schedules were given to them. No clearly stated goals. No individual to check in with.

Still Getting Decks and Dead Links

Most onboarding remains the same old playbook: 50-slide powerpoints, overly complicated documentation, maybe some pre-recorded videos. Only 34% said they had a peer mentor specifically assigned to them. Those that did? 79% said it was of huge help.

One said they picked up more from a Slack message with a colleague than from all training documents. Another mentioned that their mentor was "the one person who ever actually told me how things really worked."

Mentorship isn't credit extra. It's just plain old assistance.

And yet, there are still a few companies that seem to play down the extent of influence peer bonding has. People don't require shiny decks, they require someone to ask the stupid questions to.

Same Problems, Different Address

In-person or virtual didn't seem to make a difference. Onboarding was cringeworthy all round. Remote staff were a bit more likely to consider leaving early, but in-person staff complained too

One reported being taken to a desk, given a login, and dismissed for two days. Another was asked to "be creative" on a project before they found out what the company does.

Another reported, "I didn't even get to meet my team until day four. I thought maybe I was in the wrong Slack channel."

These are not aberrations. They're trends. The outcome? People wondering why they took the deal in the first place.

The Attention Span Myth

There are a few who like to spin the tale of how Gen Z is lacking in attention span. That's a cop-out. They're just accustomed to content being simple and uncluttered.

63% said that onboarding videos longer than 15 minutes were too long while they were being surveyed. 75% admitted scrolling through repetition or irrelevant parts.

Not because they are unmotivated, because they respect their time. And they understand when something is wasting unnecessarily.

Give them a five-minute explain vid. Text documents with plain text. Loom tutorials. Give them anything that has some respect for their time and simplicity.

When the First Week Is a Red Flag

There were some amazing tales. One manager never appeared all week, one had to pen a poem on corporate values, and one left two weeks later.

That's absurd. But it did happen. And they aren't typical.

Gen Z is listening. If the firm says they are "flexible" but rewards someone to eat their lunch out of the office, something is wrong. If the job description promises teamwork but the orientation is mysterious and lone-ranger, trust is easily lost.

And once lost, hard to restore.

What Works (to Them)

The solutions aren't hard:

• Keep meetings short and sweet
• Provide a clear map or plan
• Have a friend, and not a supervisor, call to follow up
• Give real answers about pay, policy, and opportunity
• Call to follow up, ask them how they are, and be interested in the response
• Make it easy to return to again so they won't have to wonder twice

That's not new. Just human.

Onboarding Isn't Just Admin Tasks

It's the company's opportunity to show that what they said they would have in the interview actually exists. And Gen Z is watching. Up close.

They don't care about leaving early. And certainly not about telling them why. A source described how they left a Glassdoor review of their same-day resignation. Another complained on Reddit that they were "left completely alone" for a week.

Others taught friends not to apply. And those friends complied. A recruiter admitted that when their rejected candidate called with a question, the candidate responded, "I heard your onboarding is a disaster."

That's not the sort of PR that can be fixed with a little branding Band-Aid.

It's Fixable

Gen Z isn't waiting for improved systems. If onboarding is fragmented or tone-deaf, they'll jump ship.

But that ain't no big secret. Optimizing onboarding isn't about hip-ifying it. It's about smart-ifying it. Give recently hired individuals some structure. Give them the keys to contact actual flesh-and-blood human beings. Be honest about what the work is, what the culture is, and what they're getting themselves into.".

If the first week is neat and respectful, they know they belong. If it's sloppy or cringeworthy, they don't. And if that's made clear, it's difficult to undo.

Onboarding is the company's first actual conversation with a new hire. It can build trust, or shatter it.

Gen Z has made one thing clear which one they will put up with.

Read next:

• New Study Shows Which Countries Use VPN Most and Least

• Android’s AI Shields Outperform iPhone as New Studies Highlight Scam Protection Gap
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

AI’s Limits Exposed: New Study Finds Machines Struggle With Real Remote Work

For years, discussion around artificial intelligence has centered on whether machines could eventually replace human jobs. That question has become sharper with the growth of remote work, where tasks are handled entirely online and often require a mix of technical and creative ability. Yet a new study from the Center for AI Safety and Scale AI provides a clearer picture of what AI can actually do in those settings. The findings show that, despite steady progress in reasoning and automation tools, today’s AI systems can complete only a small fraction of real freelance projects at human quality levels.

The study, called the Remote Labor Index (RLI), represents one of the most detailed attempts so far to measure AI’s performance on practical digital work. It focuses on tasks that mirror real online freelancing jobs rather than theoretical tests or benchmark problems. Researchers collected 240 completed projects from professional freelancers working through platforms such as Upwork. Each project included the original brief, all input materials, and the final deliverable that a client had accepted. These projects came from 23 categories of work, including product design, animation, architecture, game development, and data analysis. Together they covered more than 6,000 hours of paid labor valued at about $140,000.

Six advanced AI agents were then tested on the same projects. The systems included Manus, Grok 4, Sonnet 4.5, GPT-5, ChatGPT agent, and Gemini 2.5 Pro. Human evaluators compared the AI results to the professional standards of the original deliverables. The measure used was called the automation rate, defined as the percentage of projects that an AI completed to a standard that would be acceptable to a reasonable client.

The overall results placed current AI performance close to the bottom of the scale. Manus achieved the best outcome, with a 2.5 percent automation rate. Grok 4 and Sonnet 4.5 followed at 2.1 percent, while GPT-5 and ChatGPT agent reached 1.7 and 1.3 percent. Gemini 2.5 Pro finished last at 0.8 percent. In effect, even the strongest model could only complete two or three projects successfully out of every hundred. These numbers confirm that most paid remote work remains well beyond the reach of today’s AI systems.

To understand why, the study reviewed where and how the models failed. Nearly half of the AI outputs were judged to be of poor quality. About 36 percent were incomplete, and 18 percent contained technical errors such as corrupted or unusable files. Many tasks broke down before completion, with missing visuals, truncated videos, or unfinished code. Others showed inconsistency between design elements, such as an object changing shape between different 3D views. These errors highlight that even powerful models lack the internal verification ability that human workers apply when checking and refining their own results.

The researchers also noted that remote projects typically combine several layers of skill. A single job might involve writing, coding, design choices, and client-level presentation. While current AI models can produce functional text, basic graphics, or snippets of code, they often fail to align all these elements into a coherent, professional output. The lack of integrated quality control leads to results that are close to correct in parts but unsatisfactory as complete deliverables.

Some narrow areas showed stronger AI performance. Tasks involving short audio clips, simple image generation, or data visualization were occasionally completed at human level. In those cases, the systems benefited from established generative tools that already handle single-format media. The study used an additional metric, known as an Elo score, to track relative progress between different models. Although none matched the human baseline, newer models did show measurable improvement compared with earlier versions, suggesting steady if limited advancement.

Economically, the gap between potential and reality remains wide. When translated into market value, the highest-earning model, Manus, produced accepted work worth only $1,720 out of a total pool of nearly $144,000. This indicates that the contribution of current AI tools to freelance productivity is still marginal. The data also show that AI has not yet achieved meaningful cost deflation in remote labor markets, since most tasks still require full human oversight or redo.

For professionals who depend on online freelance income, the study’s conclusions provide some reassurance. Remote workers, especially in design, architecture, and multimedia fields, remain largely irreplaceable at present. The same applies to roles that involve judgment, error correction, and visual or interactive quality checks. However, the results also point to a gradual path of improvement. As AI models gain better multimodal reasoning and tool-use capacity, they may begin to handle larger portions of complex tasks under supervision.

The authors acknowledge that the benchmark does not cover all types of remote jobs. Work involving direct client communication, teamwork, or long-term project management was excluded. Even so, the Remote Labor Index represents the broadest test so far of AI’s real automation capacity in economically meaningful work. Its value lies in offering empirical measurement rather than assumption. By grounding AI evaluation in actual freelance projects, it shifts the conversation from hypothetical capabilities to demonstrated performance.

The findings suggest that the path to full automation of digital labor remains long. While AI can now assist with smaller creative or technical steps, it still struggles with the coordination, judgment, and quality assurance that professional work requires. Future updates to the RLI may help track whether ongoing model improvements translate into practical economic performance. For now, the study confirms that artificial intelligence, though advancing quickly, has yet to match the reliability and completeness of human remote workers.

Image: Yasmina H / Unsplash

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools.

Read next: Carnegie Mellon Study Finds Advanced AI Becomes More Self-Interested, Undermining Teamwork as It Gets Smarter
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

How Social Media Loyalty Loops Make Us Copy the Worst Behavior from Our Own Group

Social media has long been blamed for amplifying anger and hostility, but a new line of research suggests that the real source of toxicity may not be our opponents at all. It often begins with the people we already agree with.

A recent study from the University of Haifa found that users who see rude or intolerant posts from their own political side are far more likely to mirror that behavior than when they encounter hate from the opposing side.

Toxicity That Feels Familiar

The researchers analyzed millions of posts shared on X (formerly Twitter) in Israel during 2023, a year marked by deep political division. They wanted to understand how toxic behavior spreads and whether it moves differently inside or across political groups. Their focus wasn’t only on how users express hostility, but also on the kind of toxicity they adopt. They separated two dimensions of harmful speech: impolite style, which covers rude tone or foul language, and intolerant substance, which involves messages that demean social or political groups.

Across more than seven million tweets, one clear pattern emerged. People were significantly more likely to post toxic messages after seeing such behavior from their own side. This “ingroup contagion” proved stronger than any reaction to insults from opponents. When users saw hostility from the other side, they often responded defensively but not as intensely. The strongest predictor of new toxic posts was exposure to toxicity that came wrapped in familiarity.

The Pull of Belonging

The finding reflects a deeper social mechanism. People online do not only communicate as individuals; they perform as representatives of their group. When members of the same political community use harsh language, others interpret that tone as part of the group’s identity. To fit in, they copy it. It’s a form of social mirroring shaped by loyalty, not simply by outrage.

On platforms built around likes, replies, and visibility, such behavior brings quick social rewards. Users who echo the style of their peers can gain approval and attention. Over time, that cycle of validation turns hostility into habit. The researchers call this dynamic a “contagion,” not because people lose control, but because social media design makes imitation effortless.

Where Algorithms Meet Identity

What makes this process powerful is how platforms amplify identity signals. Algorithms that prioritize engagement naturally favor emotional and confrontational content. As posts from one’s own side fill the feed, the distinction between passionate support and open hostility blurs. Even moderate users may start matching the tone they see most often.

Interestingly, the study found that echo chambers (online spaces filled only with like-minded users) were not the worst environments for contagion. People surrounded by uniform opinions already hold firm views and feel less need to prove their loyalty. Toxicity spread faster in mixed networks, where users are exposed to both allies and opponents. The friction of that diversity appeared to intensify imitation within groups.

From Rudeness to Intolerance

The research also revealed a subtle but worrying shift. Exposure to mild forms of impoliteness, such as sarcasm or insults, sometimes led users to post not just rude comments but openly intolerant ones. In other words, small breaches of civility could snowball into expressions that reject or devalue other social groups. What begins as casual frustration can evolve into language that undermines democratic norms of respect and inclusion.

Breaking the Loop

While the study focused on political communication in Israel, the patterns it uncovered apply broadly. Across digital platforms, people tend to model their tone on the behavior of those they identify with. That human impulse is what keeps communities coherent - and what makes them vulnerable to turning sour.

Understanding this dynamic shifts responsibility away from blaming algorithms alone. Social media’s design does encourage hostility, but much of the toxicity that circulates online grows out of ordinary acts of imitation. Each time users echo the anger of their peers, they reinforce the idea that aggression is part of belonging.

The next time a heated post from a familiar account flashes across the screen, it may help to pause before responding in kind. What feels like standing with one’s side might simply be feeding the very cycle that keeps social media meaner than it needs to be.

Notes: This post was edited/created using GenAI tools. Image: DIW-Aigen.

Read next: Search That Knows You: Google’s AI Era Keeps Ads Alive in a More Personal Web
by Asim BN via Digital Information World

Search That Knows You: Google’s AI Era Keeps Ads Alive in a More Personal Web

Google is moving search into a new phase that blends artificial intelligence with deeper personal context, but it is not leaving advertising behind. Its experimental AI Mode in Search, which is gradually being tested through Google Labs, reflects how the company now wants search to feel more like a conversation that understands a user’s intent, habits, and even data spread across other Google services. Rather than typing short phrases, people can describe what they want in fuller language, attach images, or speak naturally, and the system reasons through multiple layers of information before delivering a response that ties together web results, live local data, and visual references.

The company’s vice president for Search, Robby Stein, explained in a recent conversation that the goal is to help users reach decisions more quickly by connecting what Google already knows about the world with what it can learn about each individual. Early experiments let people opt in to more tailored experiences, such as personalized restaurant suggestions or shopping advice, based on their previous interactions. Over time, this could expand to include Gmail, Drive, and Calendar, allowing the system to pull relevant details like flight schedules or meeting times to produce answers that match personal circumstances. Google insists these options will remain voluntary, but the move clearly signals a step toward a search engine that functions as a companion rather than a static information tool.

While the shift toward personalization sounds like a departure from traditional search, Google’s advertising model remains firmly in place. Instead of removing ads, the company is exploring how they can evolve inside conversational or multimodal results. The same reasoning systems that interpret complex questions might soon recognize when someone is planning a home renovation or comparing prices and present sponsored suggestions that fit naturally within those contexts. These won’t appear as the familiar boxes of text links but as integrated recommendations that match the flow of an AI-driven conversation. Google calls this an experiment in new ad formats, a cautious attempt to see how commercial information can live within generative interfaces without overwhelming the user experience.

For businesses, the change redefines how visibility works. In Stein’s words, AI often “thinks like a person,” meaning it values reliability and clear context over raw keyword density. The companies that appear in AI recommendations will likely be those already cited in trustworthy sources or reviewed positively across Google’s ecosystem. Traditional signals such as content quality, site clarity, and consistent information remain crucial, but now they feed directly into how AI models interpret authority. As a result, public visibility may depend as much on how accessible information is to algorithms as on how appealing it is to human readers.

What emerges from all this is a vision of search that feels more fluid and intuitive but also more intertwined with personal data and commercial logic. Google’s bet is that people will accept deeper personalization in exchange for convenience and precision. If AI Mode delivers on that promise, the boundary between browsing, asking, and buying could fade into a single experience, one that understands not only what users want but who they are.

Read next: New Study Shows Which Countries Use VPN Most and Least
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World

New Study Shows Which Countries Use VPN Most and Least

The latest Cybernews study examines the download numbers of VPN applications and compares them to the populations of each of the 106 analyzed countries to determine the per capita usage and identify where VPNs are most popular.

Perhaps to little surprise, VPNs are most used in countries with strict internet restrictions, particularly in Arab countries like the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.

In these countries, the government has restricted access to VoIP services (Voice over Internet Protocol) like WhatsApp, FaceTime, Skype, etc.

Moreover, because it does not align with Islamic values, the majority of adult and gambling websites are banned as well.

Some journalists also turn to VPNs to express their opinions freely without the fear of repercussions from the government.

That’s why 5 out of the top 10 countries with the highest vpn adoption are Arab nations:

Top 10 countries for VPN adoption rates

1. UAE – 65.78% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
2. Qatar – 55.43% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
3. Singapore – 38.23% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
4. Nauru – 35.49% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
5. Oman – 31.04% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
6. Saudi Arabia – 28.93% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
7. The Netherlands – 21.77% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
8. The United Kingdom (UK) – 19.63% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
9. Kuwait – 17.88% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)
10. Luxembourg – 17.30% average adoption rate (2020 - 2025)

In contrast, the 10 countries with the lowest VPN adoption are predominantly African countries except for China and Vanuatu.

The 10 countries with the lowest VPN adoption are: China, Malawi, Angola, Zambia, Cameroon, Rwanda, Zimbabwe, Kenya, Vanuatu, and Tanzania.

Although China is a nuanced case, and these findings should be taken with a grain of salt, since the methodology of the Cybernews study calculates adoption rates based on the 50 largest provider download numbers from the Google Play Store and Apple App Store.

However, Google Play Store is banned in China, and Apple’s App Store is very restricted, with most VPN apps removed.

In turn, most Chinese citizens seek various workarounds to install VPNs, such as side-loading applications downloaded from official or even untrustworthy websites, or using lesser-known apps that are still not blocked by the Chinese government.

So, even though China ranks as the lowest VPN adopter in the study, this is likely not the case due to the limitations of the methodology.

VPN downloads and adoption statistics of the last 5 years

Across 106 countries, the average VPN adoption rate rose from 6.95% in 2020 to 10.58% in 2024. That’s roughly an 11.4% compound annual growth rate.

Global downloads by year:

• 2020: 284,591,457
• 2021: 295,722,780
• 2022: 487,049,573
• 2023: 404,248,986
• 2024: 464,021,602
• 2025 (H1): 282,101,253

The total download numbers globally show that downloads have increased overall year by year, except for a slight dip in 2023, as it was challenging for growth to keep pace after the 2022 COVID-19 numbers.

Additionally, the first half of 2025 downloads already nearly match those of the entire year 2020, and 2025 is on track to meet or exceed the demand of 2024.

Global adoption rates by year

• 2020: 6.95%
• 2021: 6.84%
• 2022: 10.06%
• 2023: 10.90%
• 2024: 12.35%
• 2025 (H1): 6.89%

Similarly to download numbers, they are steadily growing overall year by year, despite a slight decline in 2021.

A closer look at G7 countries

United States (global rank 21)

Adoption peaked at 19.75% in 2022. It was 18.36% in 2024 and 10.56% in H1 2025.

Downloads are the highest in the world: 63.4 million in 2024 and 36.7 million in H1 2025.

United Kingdom (global rank 8)

Adoption climbed from a low of 15.80% in 2021 to 24.08% in 2024. H1 2025 sits at 15.38%.

Downloads reached 16.6 million in 2024 and 10.7 million in H1 2025.

Germany (global rank 17)

Adoption rose from 6.94% in 2020 to 21.36% in 2024. H1 2025 is 10.77%.

Downloads hit 18.1 million in 2024 and 9.1 million in H1 2025.

Canada (global rank 18)

Adoption peaked at 17.18% in 2024. H1 2025 is 10.76%.

Downloads totaled 6.8 million in 2024 and 4.3 million in H1 2025.

France (global rank 22)

Adoption reached 16.64% in 2024. H1 2025 stands at 10.55%.

Downloads were 11.1 million in 2024 and 7.0 million in H1 2025.

Italy (global rank 73)

Adoption peaked at 7.48% in 2023 and eased to 7.04% in 2024. H1 2025 is 3.91%.

Downloads hit 4.2 million in 2024 and 2.3 million in H1 2025.

Japan (global rank 84)

Adoption remains low. It was 4.63% in 2020, 4.32% in 2024, and 2.60% in H1 2025.

Downloads reached 5.3 million in 2024 and 3.2 million in H1 2025.

Why the Middle East leads

Governments in the Gulf filter content and restrict categories like adult sites, gambling, and some political material.

Many also limit VoIP calling on WhatsApp, Skype, and FaceTime, which makes everyday communication more challenging without a VPN, especially considering that there are many people in the UAE who have their families waiting for weekly calls from abroad.

One more point worth mentioning is that personal VPN use sits in a legal gray area. For the most part, you won’t get in trouble for using a VPN; however, if you use a VPN while committing a crime, then the penalties are increased significantly.

What drives adoption in Europe and Singapore

In Singapore, the Netherlands, the UK, and Luxembourg, the demand for VPNs shifts more towards overcoming content restrictions, such as accessing the widest Netflix libraries.

Security is a consistent concern across all countries, of course.

And privacy is a considerable reason even in countries where the government doesn’t necessarily monitor their citizens as strictly as Arab nations. Yet, many people in free democracies still don’t like the idea that their internet service provider (ISP) can see everything they do online.

The Ukraine-Russia war drove up VPN adoption significantly

War shock moved up the numbers fast. Ukraine’s adoption rate was 6.14% in 2021. It jumped to 18.92% in 2022 and has remained above 10% since then. Russia's adoption rate increased from 4.28% in 2021 to 42.20% in 2022.

A note on the US

The US shows why adoption percentage and raw downloads tell different stories.

The US is outside the global top 20 by per‑capita adoption, yet the total download volume of VPN apps in the US is the largest globally.

People use VPNs to limit ISP tracking, stay secure on public Wi‑Fi, avoid DDoS attacks, and keep access to streaming catalogs while traveling.

While hard content blocks are rare in the US, the internet is generally unrestricted, but privacy, security, and convenience keep demand growing.

Methodology limits worth considering

Cybernews compared app store downloads to population to estimate adoption. It’s a clean way to compare countries of different sizes, but there are limits.

• Downloads don’t equal unique users. Reinstalls and device changes inflate totals.
• Store region doesn’t always match where someone lives. That matters in restricted markets.
• Desktop apps, direct website downloads, and side‑loaded Android APKs aren’t counted.
• Adoption per capita doesn’t adjust for internet access or smartphone ownership.
• The dataset covers 50 VPN providers. Niche or regional apps might be missing.
• The analysis spots patterns, but it doesn’t prove cause.

Read next:

• Android’s AI Shields Outperform iPhone as New Studies Highlight Scam Protection Gap
by Irfan Ahmad via Digital Information World