Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program Explained

What Is the Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program?

The Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program (VAMP) is Visa's consolidated framework for monitoring fraud and dispute activity across acquirers and their merchants. As the name states, VAMP formally monitors acquirers — the banks that sponsor merchant accounts — but it measures activity at both the acquirer-portfolio level and the individual merchant level, and its thresholds drive the remediation pressure that merchants feel through their acquirer.

VAMP matters to merchants for a simple reason: it defines the ratios by which Visa judges whether a merchant's fraud and dispute activity is acceptable. A merchant whose activity exceeds VAMP's merchant-level thresholds creates a problem for its acquirer, and acquirers manage that problem through remediation plans, fees, restrictions, reserves — or by exiting the merchant relationship entirely.

This guide reflects Visa's program position as of July 2026. VAMP details have changed several times since the program's introduction, and they can change again. Treat this as orientation, and confirm current figures with your acquirer, processor, or Visa representative before making decisions on them.

What Programs Did VAMP Consolidate?

VAMP replaced Visa's previous separate monitoring regimes — the Visa Dispute Monitoring Program (VDMP), which tracked dispute activity, and the Visa Fraud Monitoring Program (VFMP), which tracked reported fraud — consolidating both into a single program with one combined metric.

The consolidation changed the logic of monitoring. Under the old structure, fraud and disputes were measured separately, each with its own thresholds. Under VAMP, fraud reports and disputes are added together in a single count-based numerator. A merchant who previously stayed under both individual programs' thresholds can find the combined count tells a different story. VAMP's enforcement rollout included an advisory period, which ended September 30, 2025 — since then, the program has operated with full effect.

How the VAMP Ratio Is Calculated

The current VAMP ratio is count-based — it counts records, not dollar amounts — and covers fraud and disputes on card-not-present VisaNet transactions under the applicable program rules:

              Count of TC40 Fraud Reports + Count of TC15 Disputes
VAMP Ratio = ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────
                     Count of Settled TC05 Transactions

The numerator groups both record types together: fraud reports plus disputes. The denominator is the count of settled transactions. Because everything is a count, transaction size is irrelevant — a disputed $5 transaction and a disputed $5,000 transaction weigh the same, and high average tickets do not dilute the ratio. The components are defined below, and the difference between the two numerator records is covered in depth in TC40 vs TC15.

What Counts as TC40 Fraud Activity?

TC40 records are fraud reports filed by issuing banks when cardholders report transactions as fraudulent. A TC40 is a report, not a chargeback: no funds move and no merchant response is required. But under VAMP, fraud reports count in the numerator whether or not they ever become disputes.

This is the piece merchants most often miss. Fraud-coded activity that never appears in a chargeback dashboard still accumulates in Visa's count. A merchant experiencing card-testing attacks, stolen-credential abuse, or heavy first-party misuse can build VAMP exposure that its processor reporting never displays.

What Counts as TC15 Dispute Activity?

TC15 records represent dispute activity — the chargeback messaging that moves through VisaNet when an issuer files a dispute. These are the cases merchants see in their processor portals: funds reversed, reason code attached, response window running.

Within VAMP's numerator, dispute records are counted under Visa's program rules, which define which dispute categories and conditions are included and how special cases are treated. Merchants should not assume every processor-visible dispute maps one-to-one to a counted record, or vice versa — the authoritative count is Visa's, reported through the acquirer.

What Counts as a Settled TC05 Transaction?

TC05 records are settled Visa transactions — the cleared card-not-present sales that make up the ratio's denominator under the applicable program rules. The denominator matters as much as the numerator: a merchant's ratio can deteriorate because fraud and disputes rose, or because settled volume fell while problem counts stayed flat.

Seasonal merchants should note the interaction: in low-volume months, the same absolute number of fraud and dispute records produces a higher ratio. Monitoring plans should account for volume cycles rather than assuming a constant denominator.

Current VAMP Thresholds

As of July 2026, Visa's published VAMP thresholds are as follows. Basis points (bp) express the ratio — 100 bp equals 1%.

Key points: Visa identifies an acquirer portfolio as Above Standard at 50 basis points and Excessive at 70 basis points. The merchant Excessive threshold for the United States, Canada, the European Union, and Asia-Pacific changed to 150 basis points effective April 1, 2026, with a monthly count requirement of 1,500 fraud and dispute records. Latin America and the Caribbean also uses 150 basis points with a 1,500-record monthly count. CEMEA (Central Europe, Middle East, and Africa) uses 220 basis points with at least 150 monthly records and at least USD 75,000 in amount.

These figures can change. Confirm the current thresholds and count requirements for your region with your acquirer, processor, or Visa representative.

Acquirer Thresholds vs Merchant Thresholds

The two threshold tiers interact in ways merchants should understand:

• Merchant thresholds identify individual merchant accounts whose fraud-plus-dispute ratio is Excessive. Breaching them makes the merchant a named problem within the acquirer's portfolio.
• Acquirer thresholds measure the acquirer's entire portfolio. An acquirer at Above Standard or Excessive faces its own program consequences from Visa — which changes how it treats the merchants driving the numbers.

The practical consequence: an acquirer's portfolio status can affect how merchant-level thresholds are applied. An acquirer with ample portfolio headroom may work patiently with a borderline merchant; an acquirer near its own thresholds has strong incentives to act early and aggressively — tightening internal limits below Visa's published figures, demanding remediation sooner, or offboarding risk. Merchants are therefore managing two constraints: Visa's published thresholds and their acquirer's appetite, which is usually stricter.

Which Transactions and Disputes May Be Excluded?

Visa's program rules exclude certain activity from VAMP counting, and two exclusions matter most operationally:

• Disputes resolved through qualifying pre-dispute solutions — such as cases resolved through Rapid Dispute Resolution — may be excluded, depending on the timing of the data extract. A case resolved before Visa's counting extract is a different fact than one resolved after.
• Qualifying TC40 fraud activity addressed through Compelling Evidence 3.0 may likewise be excluded, again depending on data-extract timing.

Both exclusions are rule- and timing-dependent, and Visa's rules define eligibility precisely. Merchants should treat exclusions as a reason to resolve eligible cases quickly — the earlier a qualifying case is addressed, the more likely it lands on the right side of the extract — and confirm current exclusion treatment with their acquirer rather than assuming. Pre-dispute alerts are the operational mechanism behind the first exclusion.

What Happens When a Merchant Exceeds a Threshold?

Visa's program consequences flow through the acquirer, and the acquirer's response typically escalates through stages: notification and a demand for explanation; a required remediation plan with dispute-reduction and fraud-control commitments; program fees and enhanced oversight; and, if the numbers do not improve, tighter processing terms, rolling reserves, or termination of the merchant account.

Termination is the outcome to take seriously — a terminated merchant can be reported on industry watch lists, making replacement processing difficult and expensive. The stages before termination exist to produce improvement, which means a merchant who arrives at the remediation conversation with data, a credible plan, and early results is in a categorically better position than one who is surprised by the letter.

Why a Processor Chargeback Ratio May Differ From VAMP

A processor's internal chargeback ratio may not equal the Visa VAMP ratio, and merchants who track only the former get blindsided:

• Fraud reports are missing from most chargeback dashboards — half of the VAMP numerator.
• Definitions differ — processors may calculate chargeback rate with different numerators (all disputes vs certain categories), denominators (sales count vs volume, current vs prior month), and timing than Visa's count-based methodology.
• Scope differs — VAMP's ratio covers card-not-present VisaNet activity under program rules; processor ratios typically blend all card brands and channels.
• Fragmentation — merchants running multiple MIDs or processors see partial views in each portal, while Visa counts what Visa sees.

Use processor ratios for operations, but track VAMP-relevant counts — fraud reports plus disputes against settled Visa CNP transactions — as their own metric.

How Merchants Can Reduce VAMP Exposure

Reducing VAMP exposure means reducing the numerator, protecting the denominator, and using the program's own exclusions:

1. Cut fraud at the source — screening, authentication, and velocity controls against card testing and stolen credentials, targeted using fraud-report trends.
2. Prevent avoidable disputes — descriptors, expectations, cancellation flows, and fast complaint handling, per our prevention guide.
3. Resolve eligible cases pre-dispute — alerts and RDR keep qualifying cases out of the count, subject to timing and program rules.
4. Use CE 3.0 where disputes qualify — qualifying fraud activity addressed through Compelling Evidence 3.0 may be excluded depending on extract timing.
5. Watch the denominator — plan for volume seasonality and avoid routing changes that shrink settled Visa volume while problem counts persist.
6. Monitor continuously with internal thresholds below Visa's — remediation begun at 100 bp is planning; remediation begun at 150 bp is crisis response.

None of this guarantees any particular program outcome — but each step reduces the activity the program counts.

What Merchants Should Ask Their Acquirer or Processor

VAMP management is a shared exercise with your acquirer. Questions worth asking now, not after a notification letter:

• What is my current VAMP-relevant ratio and monthly fraud-plus-dispute count, per MID?
• What fraud-report (TC40-type) visibility can you provide, and how often?
• What internal thresholds do you apply, and how do they compare with Visa's published figures?
• How are my pre-dispute resolutions and CE 3.0 outcomes being treated in the counts?
• What is your portfolio's own program status, and how does it affect your merchant policies?
• What would your remediation process look like if my ratio approached the threshold?

Acquirers respond well to merchants who ask these questions unprompted — it signals exactly the risk maturity the program is designed to encourage.

How Threshold Defense™ Supports VAMP Monitoring

Threshold Defense™ gives merchants a continuous, consolidated view of VAMP-relevant exposure: fraud and dispute counts against settled transaction volume, tracked per MID and across every connected gateway and processor, with internal alarm thresholds set safely below network figures. Fraud Signal™ supplies the fraud-report side of the numerator, AlertBridge™ resolves eligible cases in the pre-dispute window where exclusions are possible, and Chargeback Shield™ keeps dispute responses organized while remediation reduces the underlying activity.

To be clear about the boundaries: Payment Defender does not control Visa's calculations or program determinations, and no provider can guarantee VAMP compliance or a lower VAMP ratio. What disciplined monitoring provides is time — the difference between managing exposure and discovering it. Schedule a risk review to see your current headroom.