VAMP and Monitoring
VAMP in 2026: What Merchants Need to Monitor
Review the current Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program ratio, merchant thresholds, TC40 and TC15 activity, exclusions, regional rules, and the data merchants should monitor in 2026.
VAMP is no longer a future program merchants can treat as a planning exercise. The advisory period ended in 2025, the program now combines key fraud and dispute signals, and the merchant threshold for several major regions changed on April 1, 2026.
This article covers the current 2026 operating position: what the program measures, where the thresholds sit today, and — most practically — which data a merchant should be monitoring every month. For the complete foundational explanation of the program, read the complete Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program guide.
Why VAMP Requires Merchant Attention in 2026
The Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program formally holds acquirers accountable for the fraud and dispute activity in their portfolios — but acquirers manage that accountability by monitoring, remediating, repricing, and sometimes exiting the merchants driving the numbers. The VAMP advisory period ended on September 30, 2025, which means identification now carries consequences rather than warnings. A merchant that only watches its processor's chargeback ratio can drift toward a Visa threshold without seeing it coming, because the program counts signals most chargeback reports do not show.
What the Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program Measures
VAMP's fraud-and-dispute measurement combines two activity streams that used to be tracked by separate programs: reported fraud (TC40) and disputes (TC15), measured against settled card-not-present transaction volume. The program also includes enumeration monitoring — automated card-testing detection — but this article's primary focus is the fraud-and-dispute VAMP ratio, because that is the measurement most directly driven by a merchant's day-to-day payment operations.
How the VAMP Ratio Is Calculated
The VAMP ratio is a count-based calculation:
VAMP Ratio =
Count of TC40 Fraud Reports + TC15 Disputes
───────────────────────────────────────────
Count of Settled TC05 Card-Not-Present Transactions
The numerator is the combined count of TC40 fraud reports plus TC15 disputes. The denominator is the count of settled TC05 card-not-present VisaNet transactions under the applicable rules.
Visa's calculation is count-based and remains subject to current program rules, timing, exclusions, regional requirements, and Visa's underlying data.
The Current 2026 VAMP Thresholds
| Entity or Region | Ratio Threshold | Minimum Monthly Activity | Current Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| Acquirer Above Standard | 50 basis points | Applicable program minimum count | Portfolio-level identification |
| Acquirer Excessive | 70 basis points | Applicable program minimum count | Portfolio-level identification |
| Merchant — United States, Canada, European Union, and Asia-Pacific | 150 basis points | At least 1,500 fraud and dispute records | Threshold effective April 1, 2026 |
| Merchant — Latin America and the Caribbean | 150 basis points | At least 1,500 fraud and dispute records | Regional merchant threshold |
| Merchant — CEMEA | 220 basis points | At least 150 fraud and dispute records and at least USD 75,000 in amount | Regional merchant threshold |
The applicable merchant treatment can depend on the acquirer's portfolio status, region, current Visa rules, and Visa's program determination. Merchants should confirm their current position with their acquirer, processor, or Visa representative.
What Changed on April 1, 2026
The merchant excessive threshold for the United States, Canada, the European Union, and Asia-Pacific changed to 150 basis points on April 1, 2026. For merchants in those regions, the working margin between routine dispute activity and program identification narrowed, and monthly monitoring that was comfortable under the prior level may no longer be. Latin America and the Caribbean uses a 150-basis-point merchant threshold with the applicable 1,500-record minimum, and CEMEA uses a 220-basis-point threshold with at least 150 monthly fraud and dispute records and at least USD 75,000 in amount. Program rules and thresholds can change, which is why every figure in this article is tied to the last reviewed date shown below.
TC40 Fraud Reports and TC15 Disputes
The numerator mixes two different things, and the distinction matters operationally. A TC40 fraud report is an issuer's report of confirmed fraud on a transaction — it is not a chargeback, and money does not move because of it. A TC15 dispute is Visa dispute activity — and TC15 disputes are not identical to TC40 reports, though a single bad transaction can generate both. A merchant can accumulate TC40 reports it never sees in a chargeback report, which is exactly how monitoring exposure grows invisibly. The difference between TC40 fraud reports and TC15 disputes guide walks through the mechanics.
What Counts in the Denominator
The denominator uses settled TC05 card-not-present VisaNet transactions under the applicable rules. Practical implications: card-present volume does not pad the ratio, unsettled authorizations do not count, and a merchant whose card-not-present volume drops — seasonally or structurally — can see its ratio rise even when fraud and dispute counts stay flat.
Which Activity May Be Excluded
Two exclusion categories matter most for merchants:
- Visa may exclude disputes resolved through qualifying pre-dispute solutions, depending on data-extract timing.
- Visa may exclude qualifying TC40 fraud activity addressed through Compelling Evidence 3.0, depending on data-extract timing.
Timing is the operative word: a case resolved after Visa's data extract for the month may still count in that month's ratio. Exclusions reward fast resolution, not eventual resolution.
Why Your Processor Ratio May Not Match Visa's Ratio
A processor's internal chargeback ratio is not the same as the Visa VAMP ratio. Processor ratios often count chargebacks only (no TC40 reports), may include all card networks, may use different denominators, and apply their own timing. A merchant can look healthy in a processor dashboard while trending toward a Visa threshold — or vice versa. Both numbers matter; they answer different questions.
The Data Merchants Should Monitor
| Data Signal | What It Shows | Why It Matters | Source to Confirm |
|---|---|---|---|
| Settled TC05 card-not-present transactions | Applicable transaction volume | Forms the VAMP-ratio denominator | Acquirer or processor reporting |
| TC40 fraud reports | Issuer-reported fraud activity | Forms part of the numerator | Acquirer, processor, or fraud-data provider |
| TC15 disputes | Visa dispute activity | Forms part of the numerator | Acquirer or processor reporting |
| Pre-dispute resolutions | Eligible cases resolved earlier | May affect applicable exclusions | Alert or dispute provider |
| Compelling Evidence 3.0 qualification | Eligible fraud activity addressed through qualifying evidence | May affect applicable exclusions | Acquirer, processor, or Visa workflow |
| Merchant IDs and processor relationships | Where activity is being aggregated | Prevents fragmented monitoring | Merchant payment architecture |
A Monthly VAMP Review Checklist
- Confirm settled card-not-present Visa volume
- Confirm TC40 fraud-report counts
- Confirm TC15 dispute counts
- Review excluded pre-dispute resolutions
- Review qualifying CE3.0 activity
- Compare internal data with processor or acquirer reports
- Review activity by MID, processor, region, and business line
- Investigate sudden fraud or dispute changes
- Confirm the current acquirer portfolio status when available
- Document follow-up actions and owners
A monthly review builds the visibility this program demands, but it does not by itself satisfy every Visa requirement — treat it as the floor, not the ceiling. Reducing the activity behind the numbers is a broader chargeback prevention strategy.
Questions to Ask Your Acquirer or Processor
- Which of my merchant IDs are aggregated together for VAMP measurement?
- What is your portfolio's current VAMP status, and how does that affect the threshold applied to me?
- Can you provide my monthly TC40, TC15, and settled TC05 card-not-present counts — not just chargebacks?
- Which of my pre-dispute resolutions and CE3.0 cases qualified for exclusion last month, and which missed the data-extract timing?
- At what internal level do you flag a merchant for remediation, and where am I against it?
If the answers are vague, that is itself a finding worth documenting.
How Payment Defender Supports VAMP Visibility
Payment Defender does not control Visa's calculations, and no vendor can guarantee VAMP compliance or a lower ratio. What a merchant can control is visibility and speed: seeing fraud-report and dispute counts as they accumulate, resolving eligible cases through channels whose qualifying outcomes may be excluded, and comparing internal data against acquirer reporting every month. That is the work this program now demands — talk to Payment Defender about putting it on one screen.