If I looked correctly the PDF, Norwegian krone was in top 15, not Turkish Lira. But if I did not, then nothing. 82.141.73.182 (talk) 06:15, 22 April 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Why does this template express the percentages in this manner? Surely, since each currency in a pairing can only appear once in that pairing, where it says '87.0%' for the US dollar, that means that US dollars appear (are either bought or sold) in 43.5% of trades? In which case, that figure would be more expressive. Currently, it says "The US dollar is bought or sold 87% as much as all currencies combined are bought (but not sold)", which doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Bastin 09:23, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

No, it does not mean 43.5% for US$. It means that 87% of trades include US$ as one of the two currencies. If you buy euros with US$, 100% of your trades includes both US$ and euro. 85.217.34.203 (talk) 16:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Then wouldn't a table for bought and sold make it clearer? 46.136.192.59 (talk) 22:10, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This table is a 'table for bought and sold'. It shows in how many trades the given currency was either bought or sold. Vgbyp (talk) 09:17, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is it really worth it to extend the table beyond to include the currencies with less 1% of global trading turnover? The table seems rather bulky now. Enivid (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @דוד אהרון 8:, as i already write in edit description, second part of list not can be consider as accurate rating of most traded currencies. The second reason is described above. --TheLotCarmen (talk) 19:29, 22 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you, however when you say the second part is not accurate, I don't understand what you mean, because they are all in the source : https://www.bis.org/publ/rpfx16fx.pdf. דוד אהרון 8 (talk) 03:48, 23 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I mean that rating include only currencies of Bank for International Settlements country-members - not the whole world. Currency some of the countries that are not members of BIS also can be in rating if they will be members. --TheLotCarmen (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you no more against, i revert list to top 20. --TheLotCarmen (talk) 18:19, 1 June 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What's about Bitcoin? 2405:9800:BA03:3D4B:1CCF:1C4D:AB2E:6A5F (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Significant changes to this template require prior notification of intent, to check that they have consensus. For example, whilst I agree that the correct symbol for USD is simply $ (not US$), I strongly disagree with removing the national symbols for CNY and JPY because (a) these are correct (b) are seen increasingly in English-language media (if only because ¥ is ambiguous). I have reverted pending a formal proposal. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 07:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I agree. Removing the non-Latin characters just because they would be meaningless to the majority of readers isn't a good idea in my opinion. The template should preserve its educational value. Vgbyp (talk) 11:46, 19 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Recent attempts to change the article are running into the ground because the "Symbol" column is trying to serve two purposes: (a) the symbol recognised in unicode for that currency (£, €, $ etc) and (b) the disambiguating version of it (AU$, CA$, MX$, NZ$, US$ etc).

So I propose to add another column for that purpose. Can anyone think of a succinct title? ["Abbreviation"?] And is there any reliable source for these abbreviations? Professional sources seem only to use the currency code TLA. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 15:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I see nothing wrong with the proposed column title, but it looks like the column will be empty for some currencies, no? Like for the euro for example. Vgbyp (talk) 09:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, certainly there are some like € that are unambiguous. Conversely, there are some lines where the "symbol" cell should be blank: the Swiss Franc, for example.

For the reason I am not confident in "abbreviation", take two examples: is "SFr" an abbreviation or just an alternative for people who don't understand CHF? Citation immediately needed. And the recognised abbreviation for GBP is "stg.", not GB£ as seems popular in some circles. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In case of the Swiss franc, CHF is an ISO code, SFr is an abbreviation. I see no problem in using "stg." for GBP in that column. It will have £ in a symbol column. Vgbyp (talk) 11:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Another question is "AU$", "CA$" etc. Are they abbreviations? If strictly no, does it matter? --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Draft for comment

Most traded currencies by value
Currency distribution of global foreign exchange market turnover^[1]

Rank	Currency	ISO 4217 code	Symbol	Abbreviation [note 1]	Proportion of daily volume, April 2019
1	United States dollar	USD	$	US$	88.3%
2	Euro	EUR	€		32.3%
3	Japanese yen	JPY	円 / ¥		16.8%
4	Sterling	GBP	£	stg., (GB£)	12.8%
5	Australian dollar	AUD	$	A$	6.8%
6	Canadian dollar		$	C$, CA$	5.0%
7	Swiss franc	CHF		Fr, (SFr)	5.0%
8	Renminbi	CNY	元 / ¥		4.3%
9	Hong Kong dollar	HKD	$	HK$	3.5%
10	New Zealand dollar	NZD	$	NZ$	2.1%
11	Swedish krona	SEK		kr	2.0%
12	South Korean won	KRW	₩		2.0%
13	Singapore dollar	SGD	$	S$	1.8%
14	Norwegian krone	NOK		kr	1.8%
15	Mexican peso	MXN	$	MX$	1.7%
16	Indian rupee	INR	₹		1.7%
17	Russian ruble	RUB	₽		1.1%
18	South African rand	ZAR	R		1.1%
19	Turkish lira	TRY	₺		1.1%
20	Brazilian real	BRL	R$		1.1%
21	New Taiwan dollar	TWD	$, 圓	NT$	0.9%
22	Danish krone	DKK		kr	0.6%
23	Polish złoty	PLN		zł	0.6%
24	Thai baht	THB	฿		0.5%
25	Indonesian rupiah	IDR	Rp		0.4%
26	Hungarian forint	HUF		Ft	0.4%
27	Czech koruna	CZK		Kč	0.4%
28	Israeli new shekel	ILS	₪		0.3%
29	Chilean peso	CLP	$	CLP$	0.3%
30	Philippine peso	PHP	₱		0.3%
31	UAE dirham	AED	د.إ		0.2%
32	Colombian peso	COP	$	COL$	0.2%
33	Saudi riyal	SAR	﷼		0.2%
34	Malaysian ringgit	MYR		RM	0.1%
35	Romanian leu	RON	L		0.1%
…	Other			2.2%
Total[note 2]				200.0%

First most obvious comment: list appears to have grown again, so will need to be cut back to 20. Mañana. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 23:58, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I don't agree that the list should be cut back. It is the number listed in the source. Cutting it down would mean excessive discretion as to which currencies to include and which to exclude. I mean why 20 and not 10? Or not 30? In my opinion, 35 isn't some very large number that makes the list unreadable or too long to fit articles. Vgbyp (talk) 18:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My remark was based on the preceding discussion. I don't have any preference either way except that leaving it as it is means less work at this stage. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 18:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I would agree with cutting it to 20, those currencies under 1% do not seem to be relevant enough internationally to warrant inclusion. I cannot imagine any of the Malaysian ringgit transactions are international. Anything below the Brazilian real is probably excess fat and likely does not trade internationally to any notable degree and can be grouped as "others".

The overall proposal seems good to me, there is a distinction between a symbol and an abbreviation. for example the Israeli currency is often abbreviated to "NIS" without using the shekel sign at all. The "symbol" column should include only the symbols with a devoted unicode code point ($, €, £, ¥, ₩, ₹, ₽, ₺, ฿, ₪, ₱ and ﷼), while the abbreviations can include those such as Stg. RMB, R$, NIS and so on. TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 20:22, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notes

Second draft for comment

Most traded currencies by value
Currency distribution of global foreign exchange market turnover^[1]

Rank	Currency	ISO 4217 code	Symbol	Abbreviation [note 1]	Proportion of daily volume, April 2019[citation needed]
1	United States dollar	USD	$	US$	88.3%
2	Euro	EUR	€		32.3%
3	Japanese yen	JPY	円 / ¥		16.8%
4	Sterling[note 2]	GBP	£	£ stg	12.8%
5	Australian dollar	AUD	$	$A	6.8%
6	Canadian dollar	CAD	$	Can$	5.0%
7	Swiss franc	CHF		SFr	5.0%
8	Renminbi[note 3]	CNY	元 / ¥	RMB	4.3%
9	Hong Kong dollar	HKD	$	HK$	3.5%
10	New Zealand dollar	NZD	$	$NZ	2.1%
11	Swedish krona	SEK		SKr	2.0%
12	South Korean won	KRW	₩		2.0%
13	Singapore dollar	SGD	$	S$	1.8%
14	Norwegian krone	NOK		NKr	1.8%
15	Mexican peso	MXN	$	Mex$	1.7%
16	Indian rupee	INR	₹	Rs	1.7%
17	Russian ruble	RUB	₽	Rbl	1.1%
18	South African rand	ZAR		R	1.1%
19	Turkish lira	TRY	₺	TL	1.1%
20	Brazilian real	BRL		R$	1.1%
…	Others			6.8%
Total[note 4]				200.0%

I used the World Bank's style guide as my source for the "abbreviation" column as their list seems to be largely accurate to usage "in the wild", so to speak. A notable omission they made is "RMB", but this is well known enough that it probably does not need an explicit citation as it appears on the English websites of all mainland Chinese banks. TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 20:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We would definitely need say explicitly that we are using the World Bank style guide and cite it (so please add). I am concerned, for example, that AU$ and NZ$ are widely seen, so on what reasonable basis can we omit them?

The Swiss Franc article has a citation from the central bank giving Fr (and fr) as abbreviations. So if we are not going to use "local" abbreviations we need a form of words to say so.

We need to add a notetag to Sterling and Renminbi to affirm that these are the correct names of the currencies, that 'pound' and 'yuan' are [just] their primary units.

The big problem with "long tail" tables like this is that small changes can make them out of date quickly and few people care enough to update them regularly. For example, what is the provenance [source, date] of the current table? I'm back in favour of max 20 entries again. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 21:36, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The list sourced from the triennial reports on FX volumes by the Bank for International Settlements. As their names imply, the numbers are only updated once in three years, so that's not a big problem at all. Vgbyp (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'm happy to oblige, have edited accordingly.

In the case of the Australian and New Zealand dollars, the Reserve Bank of Australia cite both $A and A$ as accepted representations of the currency, See page 8 of this file. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand is trickier because their website is poorly formatted and difficult to navigate. TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 21:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Is the WB style guide online? or at least have an ISBN?

I think we have to include A$ and NZ$; other editors will do so anyway per non-policy "everybody knows".

I see that the provenance of the numbers is given in previous discussions, so the table will need to be updated and the citation given. Mañana. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 22:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Forgot to include it in my last response, their list is on Page 134. It appears there is no fixed way of representing the Australian, Canadian, and New Zealand dollars. The CIA World Factbook offers a similar set of abbreviations, using "Can$" for the Canadian dollar and "$A" for the Australian dollar, although they do use "NZ$" for the New Zealand dollar. I am very much against citing "C$" for the Canadian dollar because this is identical to the sign for the Nicaraguan cordoba, the form "Can$" is fully disambiguating. In domestic use in all three territories an unadorned dollar sign is used exclusively, with other "dollars" having to use an abbreviation with the plain sign reserved for the domestic currency with any other forms being unofficial. While we cannot assert one over another, we can cite the recommendations of various reliable sources, as in the case of "Lit." for the Italian lira, while this enjoyed no official status it was widely used. TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 22:57, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In that case, we have to list each variant with supporting citation (and a cautionary footnote at each instance of C$). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Agreed, the main symbol cited in all three instances must be a plain dollar sign

EDIT: It turns out the only reference for an abbreviation on the Canadian dollar article supports "Can$", it seems therefore that this is the most "official" of these unofficial abbreviations. TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 21:52, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What is the rationale behind leaving the names of the countries off of sterling and renminbi while it appears in e.g. South African rand which is I think the only currency called "rand"? CapitalSasha ~ talk 22:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The South African rand is so-identified by convention, the conventions for sterling and renminbi are to use only their official names without a national identifier, sometimes prefixed or suffixed with their main unit (eg. "renminbi yuan" and "pound sterling"). TheCurrencyGuy (talk) 23:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It is very widely just called Rand. And, given that it is prefixed by the SA flag, it seems to me that honour is preserved on both sides. I support just Rand (wlinked). --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Interestingly, the Wiki article is South African rand, not Rand (currency). So maybe best to let it stand unless and until that article title is changed. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 14:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Notes

I think generally if someone is looking for the most traded currencies they are trying to figure out which currency pairs are most liquid. In other words, they would be looking for things like EUR/USD and not things like "USD". At the very least there should be a disambiguation link.96.64.153.94 (talk) 00:08, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's an idea for another template — Most traded currency pairs, though I am not sure that the topic warrants creating a template as it will likely only be used in the Foreign exchange market article. Vgbyp (talk) 09:56, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

So it could go as a normal table in that article and be given a 'see also' from this template. Now it just needs someone with the time and inclination to write it. Meaning anyone but me. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 10:31, 21 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Malverna, why? There is nothing in MOS:FLAGICON that would prohibit the use of flags in this table, and they made finding specific currency so much easier there. Vgbyp (talk) 09:24, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More specifically, MOS:INFOBOXFLAG then.

The real problem is that the table is far too long. The previous consensus was that it should be limited to the top 20 currencies, which would make finding a specific currency a lot easier. Could someone reinstate, please? (can't just chop the table, as the "others" line has to be recalculated). --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 11:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

But that's not an infobox. That's a template, which is inserted directly into the article body. Cutting it to 20 entries won't solve the finding issue as well as flag icons did. Vgbyp (talk) 10:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Vgbyp: Per MoS, flags are not decorative as an encyclopedic purpose. Pages with excessive flag icons can also cause loading problems. Malverna 01:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The use of flags in this table isn't decorative. It serves a specific purpose - making it easier to find the currency of a particular country. A table with 35 flags in it is hardly excessive. We have articles like the List of countries by intentional homicide rate, where 190+ flags serve a similar purpose. Vgbyp (talk) 10:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]