Bitpanda logo
Enterprisenew
Log in
Sign-up
Bitpanda logo

Don’t invest unless you’re prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment and you should not expect to be protected if something goes wrong. Take 2 mins to learn more.

Litecoin

Litecoin price (LTC)

Buying Litecoin (LTC) on Bitpanda is easy, fast, and secure. Check the current LTC value and live chart in GBP and get to know more about LTC.

Buying Litecoin (LTC) on Bitpanda is easy, fast, and secure. Check the current LTC value and live chart in GBP and get to know more about LTC.

€60.40

-€1.63-2.62 %
-€1.63-2.62 %



This converter shows values for info only and doesn’t reflect actual transaction rates.

Last updated: 07/10/2026, 08:00:00

paypalvisamastercard

Figures shown refer to the past, and are based on gross performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results, and fees will reduce your net returns. Reference period: last 24 hours. Source: Bitpanda, based on prices from multiple trading venues. Please review the risk disclosure before investing.

Figures shown refer to the past, and are based on gross performance. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results, and fees will reduce your net returns. Reference period: last 24 hours. Source: Bitpanda, based on prices from multiple trading venues. Please review the risk disclosure before investing.

Price of Litecoin today

Review the latest Litecoin price movements. Here is today’s trend at a glance: -2.62 %

Litecoin price statistics

Loading price statistics...

Litecoin market stats

  • Daily high

    €58.04

  • Daily low

    €54.44

  • Volatility (1M)

    20.93%

  • 52W High

    €117.54

  • 52W Low

    €34.58

  • Market cap

    €4.40B

Litecoin conversion table

1 EUR

0.0166 LTC

5 EUR

0.0828 LTC

10 EUR

0.1656 LTC

15 EUR

0.2484 LTC

20 EUR

0.3311 LTC

25 EUR

0.4139 LTC

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Us Dollar (USD)

USD 67.61

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Swiss Franc (CHF)

CHF 56.21

1 Litecoin (LTC) to British Pound Sterling (GBP)

GBP 51.12

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Turkish Lira (TRY)

TRY 3,336.00

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Polish Zloty (PLN)

PLN 265.02

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Hungarian Forint (HUF)

HUF 22,082.82

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Czech Koruna (CZK)

CZK 1,471.89

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Norwegian Krone (NOK)

NOK 647.98

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Swedish Krona (SEK)

SEK 676.53

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Danish Krone (DKK)

DKK 451.46

1 Litecoin (LTC) to Romanian Leu (RON)

RON 322.55

About Litecoin (LTC)

Launched in 2011, Litecoin is one of the oldest cryptocurrencies apart from Bitcoin. One of the key differences is that Litecoin mining uses far more memory than Bitcoin. This is intentional, to encourage more individuals to mine the cryptocurrency. Like Bitcoin, Litecoin is an open-source cryptocurrency which enables peer-to-peer payments without a central authority.

Explore other cryptocurrencies

Highest market cap

Cryptos with the highest market capitalisation

  • 600+ cryptoassets

    Buy, sell or swap cryptoassets from the UK's widest range of cryptoassets, including crypto indices and staking.

    Learn more
  • Invest your way

    Explore our exciting features, including staking, savings plans, limit orders, and more.

    Learn more
  • Safe and secure

    Safety is at the core of Bitpanda’s identity. With cutting-edge technology and a commitment to transparency, we give you the peace of mind to invest with confidence.

    Learn more
  • ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) regulations for crypto assets aim to address their environmental impact (e.g., energy-intensive mining), promote transparency, and ensure ethical governance practices to align the crypto industry with broader sustainability and societal goals. These regulations encourage compliance with standards that mitigate risks and foster trust in digital assets.

    Name

    Bitpanda Asset Management GmbH, Bitpanda GmbH

    Relevant legal entity identifier

    9845005X9B7N610K0093, 5493007WZ7IFULIL8G21

    Name of the crypto-asset

    Litecoin

    Consensus Mechanism

    Litecoin, like Bitcoin, uses Proof of Work (PoW) as its consensus mechanism, but with a few key differences: 1. Scrypt Hashing Algorithm: Unlike Bitcoin’s SHA-256 algorithm, Litecoin uses the Scrypt hashing algorithm, which is more memory-intensive. This makes mining Litecoin more accessible to regular users and limits the advantages of specialized hardware (like ASICs) in the early years. 2. Mining and Block Creation: Miners compete to solve cryptographic puzzles and, upon success, add new blocks to the blockchain. This process involves solving the Scrypt algorithm, which requires computational work. The first miner to solve the problem earns the block reward and transaction fees associated with the transactions in the block. 3. Block Time: Litecoin has a block time of 2.5 minutes, much faster than Bitcoin’s 10 minutes. This means transactions confirm more quickly, increasing the overall network speed. 4. Block Reward Halving: Similar to Bitcoin, Litecoin has a block reward halving event approximately every four years. Initially, miners earned 50 LTC per block, but this reward decreases by half after each halving event. This process continues until the maximum supply of 84 million LTC is reached. 5. Difficulty Adjustment: Litecoin adjusts the mining difficulty approximately every 2,016 blocks (about every 3.5 days) to ensure that blocks continue to be mined at a consistent rate of 2.5 minutes per block, regardless of fluctuations in the total network hash rate.

    Incentive Mechanisms and Applicable Fees

    Litecoin, like Bitcoin, uses the Proof of Work (PoW) consensus mechanism to secure transactions and incentivize miners. Incentive Mechanisms 1. Mining Rewards: Block Rewards: Miners are rewarded with Litecoin (LTC) for successfully mining new blocks. Initially, miners received 50 LTC per block, but this reward halves approximately every four years. Transaction Fees: Miners also earn transaction fees from the transactions included in the blocks they mine. Users pay fees to have their transactions processed by miners, especially when they need faster confirmation times. 2. Halving: The halving mechanism ensures that over time, fewer Litecoins are introduced into circulation, creating a deflationary model. This makes mining more valuable as the circulating supply becomes scarcer, incentivizing miners to continue participating in the network even as block rewards decrease. 3. Economic Security: The cost of mining (e.g., hardware and electricity) provides a strong economic incentive for miners to act honestly. If miners attempt to cheat or attack the network, they risk losing the computational work they invested, as invalid blocks will be rejected by the network. Fees on the Litecoin Blockchain 1. Transaction Fees: Litecoin users pay a transaction fee for each transaction, typically calculated in LTC per byte of transaction data. The fees are dynamic and vary based on network congestion. Low Fees: Litecoin is known for its relatively low transaction fees compared to other blockchains like Bitcoin, which makes it ideal for smaller transactions and micro-payments. Fee Redistribution: Collected transaction fees are distributed to miners as part of their rewards for validating transactions and securing the network.

    Beginning of the period

    2024-09-09

    End of the period

    2025-09-09

    Energy consumption

    1664196735.70713 (kWh/a)

    Energy consumption resources and methodologies

    For the calculation of energy consumptions, the so called 'top-down' approach is being used, within which an economic calculation of the miners is assumed. Miners are persons or devices that actively participate in the proof-of-work consensus mechanism. The miners are considered to be the central factor for the energy consumption of the network. Hardware is pre-selected based on the consensus mechanism's hash algorithm: Scrypt. A current profitability threshold is determined on the basis of the revenue and cost structure for mining operations. Only Hardware above the profitability threshold is considered for the network. The energy consumption of the network can be determined by taking into account the distribution for the hardware, the efficiency levels for operating the hardware and on-chain information regarding the miners' revenue opportunities. If significant use of merge mining is known, this is taken into account. When calculating the energy consumption, we used - if available - the Functionally Fungible Group Digital Token Identifier (FFG DTI) to determine all implementations of the asset of question in scope and we update the mappings regulary, based on data of the Digital Token Identifier Foundation. The information regarding the hardware used and the number of participants in the network is based on assumptions that are verified with best effort using empirical data. In general, participants are assumed to be largely economically rational. As a precautionary principle, we make assumptions on the conservative side when in doubt, i.e. making higher estimates for the adverse impacts.

    Renewable energy consumption

    29.306425042 (%)

    Energy intensity

    0.16461 (kWh)

    Scope 1 DLT GHG emissions - Controlled

    0.00000 (tCO2e/a)

    Scope 2 DLT GHG emissions - Purchased

    685642.50039 (tCO2e/a)

    GHG intensity

    0.06782 (kgCO2e)

    Key energy sources and methodologies

    To determine the proportion of renewable energy usage, the locations of the nodes are to be determined using public information sites, open-source crawlers and crawlers developed in-house. If no information is available on the geographic distribution of the nodes, reference networks are used which are comparable in terms of their incentivization structure and consensus mechanism. This geo-information is merged with public information from Our World in Data, see citation. The intensity is calculated as the marginal energy cost wrt. one more transaction. Ember (2025); Energy Institute - Statistical Review of World Energy (2024) - with major processing by Our World in Data. “Share of electricity generated by renewables - Ember and Energy Institute” [dataset]. Ember, “Yearly Electricity Data Europe”; Ember, “Yearly Electricity Data”; Energy Institute, “Statistical Review of World Energy” [original data]. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/share-electricity-renewables.

    Key GHG sources and methodologies

    To determine the GHG Emissions, the locations of the nodes are to be determined using public information sites, open-source crawlers and crawlers developed in-house. If no information is available on the geographic distribution of the nodes, reference networks are used which are comparable in terms of their incentivization structure and consensus mechanism. This geo-information is merged with public information from Our World in Data, see citation. The intensity is calculated as the marginal emission wrt. one more transaction. Ember (2025); Energy Institute - Statistical Review of World Energy (2024) - with major processing by Our World in Data. “Carbon intensity of electricity generation - Ember and Energy Institute” [dataset]. Ember, “Yearly Electricity Data Europe”; Ember, “Yearly Electricity Data”; Energy Institute, “Statistical Review of World Energy” [original data]. Retrieved from https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/carbon-intensity-electricity Licenced under CC BY 4.0.

  • Description

    These assets function as the native currency of a Layer-1 blockchain. They were created primarily to facilitate the transfer of value across a decentralised network without the need for intermediaries such as banks or payment processors. Users typically hold these assets to store value outside of the traditional financial system, hedge against inflation, or make peer-to-peer payments.

    Risks

    Volatility and Valuation Models. The value of these assets is not derived from traditional financial metrics such as revenue, dividends, cash flow, or interest rates. Unlike equities or bonds, there is no underlying balance sheet or earnings report to anchor the valuation. Instead, value depends heavily on network adoption, security hashrate, public perception, and speculative supply and demand dynamics. Consequently, prices can be extremely volatile and may react sharply to news cycles, macroeconomic shifts, regulatory announcements, or changes in investor sentiment. It is common for these assets to experience significant percentage fluctuations within a single trading day.

    Consensus Mechanism Risks. Many payments-focused blockchains utilise a Proof-of-Work (PoW) consensus mechanism. While robust, these networks are susceptible to a '51% attack'. This occurs if a single malicious actor or a colluding group of miners gains control of more than half of the network's mining power. If successful, the attacker could disrupt the network, prevent new transactions from gaining confirmations, reverse transactions completed while they were in control, and double-spend tokens. Smaller PoW networks face a significantly higher probability of such attacks.

    Scaling and Transaction Costs. These networks often prioritise security and decentralisation over transaction throughput. During periods of high global demand, the network's waiting area for unconfirmed transactions (mempool) may become congested. This results in a competitive fee market where users must pay increasingly higher fees to have their transactions prioritised by miners. This congestion can lead to significant delays in transaction processing times and a sharp increase in transaction fees. Users may find it prohibitively expensive or slow to move assets when they need them most, particularly during periods of market panic.

    Environmental Impact and Regulatory Scrutiny. PoW networks consume vast amounts of electrical energy to secure the ledger. This high energy consumption has led to criticism from environmental groups and policymakers. There is a tangible risk of regulatory crackdowns, carbon taxes, or outright bans on mining operations in various jurisdictions. Such regulatory interventions could destabilise the network by reducing the security hashrate or limiting the asset's integration with the traditional financial system and ESG-focused institutional investors.

    Limited Upgradability. Due to their decentralised nature and reliance on broad consensus among thousands of independent node operators for protocol changes, these networks can be slow to upgrade. This rigidity may prevent the protocol from adapting to new technical threats or implementing desirable features found in newer, more agile blockchains. This could lead to a gradual loss of market share and value over time as users migrate to more technologically advanced alternatives.

    Finality Risk. Transactions on PoW blockchains are probabilistic rather than deterministic. While a transaction may appear confirmed after being included in a block, there is always a theoretical risk of a 'chain reorganisation' where a competing chain with more accumulated proof-of-work becomes the definitive chain. This event could result in previously confirmed transactions being reversed or erased from the ledger.