As technology, business processes and market conditions evolve, fraudsters continuously adapt their tactics to exploit new vulnerabilities. Business owners need reliable data on emerging fraud risks. Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations provides exactly that, offering valuable insight into how fraud occurs, who commits it and which antifraud measures provide the greatest return on investment.
Every two years, the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners (ACFE) publishes a report detailing the costs, schemes, perpetrators and victims of occupational fraud. Over the last 30 years, business owners and forensic accountants have used it to understand how fraud schemes are committed, how long they go undetected, which organizations are most at risk, and which antifraud measures are the most effective at reducing losses and the duration of fraud.
The latest version covers more than 2,400 cases of occupational fraud across 143 countries. Consistent with previous biennial studies, the 2026 report estimates that the typical organization loses 5% of its revenue each year to fraud. However, this benchmark is a conservative estimate of fraud losses because many schemes go undetected or unmeasured. Plus, some losses are indirect, including lost productivity, reputational damage and the related future loss of business. Many of these losses are never fully recovered.
The ACFE report is more than a collection of statistics — it provides a roadmap for strengthening organizational resilience. Key findings include:
Median losses. Globally, the median fraud loss in the 2026 study was approximately $104,000 (down from $145,000 in 2024). The median loss for organizations with fewer than 100 employees was $126,000, compared to $123,000 for those with more than 10,000 employees.
Although the median dollar amount per incident may be similar for small and large businesses, fraud losses as a percentage of annual revenue are generally higher for smaller organizations. For many closely held businesses, a six-figure fraud loss can erase an entire year's profits and take years to recover from.
Industries. Certain industries tend to be more vulnerable to fraud than others. Industries that reported the most fraud cases in the latest study include:
Industry fraud risks can also be gauged by the amount lost per incident. Sectors with the highest median losses per incident include mining ($300,000), wholesale trade ($256,000), real estate ($250,000), energy ($220,000), and transportation and warehousing ($200,000).
Perpetrators. Frauds committed by owners and executives resulted in the largest losses (median loss of $475,000). Significantly lower amounts were lost when fraud was committed by managers ($125,000) or employees ($50,000). However, the profile of fraud perpetrators has shifted over time, with managers and executives accounting for a larger share of cases today than in the past. (See "Three Decades of Fraud: What's Changed?" below.)
Duration. The median duration for fraud schemes was 12 months, consistent with findings from 2024. Not surprisingly, the longer fraud schemes go undetected, the more financial losses they tend to cause. Frauds caught within the first six months caused a median loss of $40,000, while those that lasted longer than five years resulted in a median loss of $1.12 million.
However, shorter-duration frauds are far more common than those that take longer to detect. One-third of the frauds covered in the 2026 report lasted less than six months, and only 5% lasted more than five years.
The ACFE classifies schemes into three basic types of fraud:
Median losses were lowest for asset misappropriation ($100,000) and highest for financial misstatement ($1 million). Many cases involved multiple types of fraud schemes. For example, one-third of the frauds in the 2026 study involved both asset misappropriation and corruption. Only 1% of the cases involved financial misstatement alone.
Understanding common fraud schemes is only half the battle. Robust internal controls are essential to prevent fraudulent activity. The 2026 study compared fraud cases involving organizations with and without various control measures. The ACFE's analysis revealed that, in terms of lowering fraud losses, the five most effective internal controls were:
Weak internal controls often make it easier for perpetrators to carry out fraudulent schemes. The 2026 study found that three common weaknesses accounted for 70% of frauds: lack of internal controls, override of existing controls and lack of management review. Unfortunately, weak controls tend to be common among smaller organizations.
Internal controls help reduce the risk of fraud, but they don't provide an absolute guarantee against it. Organizations also need effective ways to uncover misconduct. Consistent with findings from 2024, the 2026 study states that the top ways organizations detected fraud schemes include:
Employees supplied more than half (55%) of the fraud tips in the study. Other common whistleblowers included customers (21%) and vendors (11%).
Anonymous reporting mechanisms can facilitate tips from whistleblowers. Web-based (46%) and email (34%) reporting mechanisms are now more popular than telephone hotlines (23%). By comparison, in 2020, the top three reporting mechanisms were used essentially equally (about one-third of tips came from each).
The ACFE recommends combining fraud training with a formal reporting mechanism to increase the likelihood that your organization will receive fraud tips. Respondents without a reporting mechanism or formal training program incurred a median loss of $175,000. By comparison, organizations with both antifraud controls in place reported a median loss of $85,000. Having both controls also reduced the duration of fraud schemes by 40%.
Fraud training sends a powerful message about your intention to fight fraud, no matter where it originates. Employees must perceive a high probability that fraudulent activity will be detected. The perception of detection is often enough to dissuade them.
Fraud remains a significant risk for all organizations, regardless of size or industry. The good news is that many effective antifraud measures are relatively straightforward and cost-effective to implement.
Your financial advisors can help reinforce your internal controls by conducting training sessions, performing surprise audits and assessing company-specific fraud risks. Organizations that currently issue compiled or reviewed financial statements may also consider upgrading to audited financials next year. And, if you detect suspicious activity, a forensic accounting specialist can investigate further.
The Association of Certified Fraud Examiners published its first report on occupational fraud and abuse in 1996. While some statistics have remained remarkably consistent, Occupational Fraud 2026: A Report to the Nations highlights several notable long-term shifts. First, corruption schemes have grown significantly. In 2026, 45% of cases involved corruption (up from only 10% in 1996).
Additionally, the profile of fraud perpetrators has changed. The following table shows that managers, owners and executives are involved in a greater percentage of fraud cases today than they were 30 years ago.
* Figures are rounded to the nearest whole percent.
The gender gap has also narrowed over the last three decades. The median loss for fraud perpetrated by men has fallen from $185,000 in 1996 to $125,000 in 2026. At the same time, the median for fraud committed by women has increased from $48,000 to $90,000 today. Outdated assumptions about who commits fraud and how schemes are carried out can create gaps in fraud risk assessments and internal controls.
Get in touch today and find out how we can help you meet your objectives.
