ENVIPE 2026: Fraud Emerges as the Most Common Crime in Mexico and Reveals a Growing Trend Toward Digital Victimization
The National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) presented the results of the 2026 National Survey on Victimization and Perceptions of Public Safety (ENVIPE), which provides information on crimes experienced by the population during 2025, as well as on perceptions of safety and institutional performance during 2026.
In addition to its key indicators of victimization, incidence, and underreporting, the ENVIPE’s broad scope allows for an in-depth examination of specific criminal phenomena. On this occasion, the UNODC-INEGI Center of Excellence presents an analysis focused on fraud, whose evolution, methods, means of commission, victim profile, economic impact, and low reporting rates highlight the growing relevance of this crime for understanding shifts in victimization in Mexico.
Fraud: From a Significant Crime to the Primary Form of Victimization
In 2025, approximately 8.1 million cases of fraud occurred in Mexico, resulting from 4.6 million cases of bank fraud and 3.6 million cases of consumer fraud. Collectively, this equates to an estimated rate of 8,290 crimes per 100,000 inhabitants and represents approximately 24.1% of the 33.8 million crimes recorded by the ENVIPE. In other words, nearly one in four crimes recorded by the survey was a fraud.
This finding is part of a broader shift in the structure of victimization. The fraud rate rose from 3,319 crimes per 100,000 inhabitants in 2012 to nearly 8,290 in 2025, an increase of approximately 150%. In the most recent period, it rose from 5,770 in 2022 to 8,290 in 2025, a growth of nearly 44%.
This trend contrasts with other traditional crimes. Between 2022 and 2025, the corresponding rate for robbery or assault on the street or on public transportation remained virtually unchanged, while the rate for residential burglary decreased by about 13%. This suggests a shift in victimization toward forms of crime that rely less on physical proximity between victim and perpetrator.
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2011–2026,
A Predominantly Digital Crime
The results of the 2026 ENVIPE survey allow us to identify the medium through which fraud occurs. In 2025, 80.6% of incidents involved the internet or electronic media—a category that includes, among others, social media, email, and online banking. In-person contact was involved in 13.3% of cases, and phone calls in 6.9%.
This pattern distinguishes fraud from other crimes analyzed by ENVIPE. While threats occur primarily through in-person contact and extortion through phone calls, fraud is markedly concentrated in digital environments.
Table 1. Methods Used to Commit Fraud, 2025
|
Method |
Percentage |
|
Internet or electronic means |
80.6% |
|
In-person contact |
13.3% |
|
Phone call |
6.9% |
|
Other means |
0.7% |
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
The data by type of fraud complements this finding. Nearly half of the fraud cases (49.9%) involved debit or credit cards or bank accounts, while 46.7% involved payment for a product or service that was ultimately not delivered.
Among fraud cases related to financial instruments, 31.4% of all fraud cases involved the misuse of a card to make purchases or payments; 11.4% involved card cloning; and 7.0% involved the withdrawal of money from bank accounts.
Table 2. Types of Fraud, 2025
|
Type |
Estimated Incidents |
% of total fraud |
|
Card or bank account fraud |
4,057,780 |
49.9% |
|
Payment for undelivered goods or services |
3,802,781 |
46.7 |
|
Card misuse for purchases or payments |
2,558,881 |
31.4 |
|
Card cloning |
931,196 |
11.4% |
|
Withdrawal of funds from a bank account |
567,703 |
7.0% |
|
Distribution of counterfeit money |
199,449 |
2.5% |
|
Unclaimed packages, gifts, or prizes |
25,020 |
0.3% |
|
Other |
48,588 |
0.6% |
The three types of misuse—cloning and withdrawal—are part of fraud associated with credit cards and bank accounts.
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
Who has the highest prevalence of fraud?
A feature that has been little explored in the overall results is that fraud exhibits a different exposure profile than crimes associated with public spaces.
By age, the highest prevalence rate is among people aged 20 to 29, with approximately 8,298 victims per 100,000 inhabitants, followed by the population aged 30 to 59, with 7,208. Among people aged 60 and older, the rate drops to approximately 3,023.
The difference is even more pronounced when broken down by educational attainment. Among people with a college education, the prevalence of fraud stands at 13,235 victims per 100,000 inhabitants, compared to 7,241 among those with a high school education, 2,822 among those with a basic education, and 645 among people with no formal education.
Table 3. Prevalence of fraud by victim characteristics, 2025
|
Characteristic |
Rate |
|
Gender |
|
|
Women |
6,111 |
|
Men |
6,695 |
|
Age |
|
|
18–19 years old |
4,124 |
|
20–29 years |
8,298 |
|
30–59 years |
7,208 |
|
60 years and older |
3,023 |
|
Education |
|
|
No education |
645 |
|
Elementary |
2,822 |
|
Upper secondary |
7,241 |
|
High school |
13,235 |
Rate per 100,000 inhabitants
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
These differences should not automatically be interpreted as causal relationships between education, age, and fraud risk. However, they do show a pattern consistent with greater exposure to financial transactions, online shopping, and digital transactions among certain population groups. They therefore represent an important avenue for further developing prevention strategies. In absolute terms, the distribution of incidents is virtually equal by gender: 51.5% involved women and 48.5% involved men.
Fraud occurs primarily during normal daily hours
Another aspect that has received little attention is the time of day when these crimes occur. Nearly half of the fraud cases (49.9%) occurred in the afternoon, between 12:01 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. Another 24.1% occurred in the morning, while 16.9% took place at night and 4.2% in the early morning hours.
This distribution once again distinguishes fraud from crimes such as vehicle theft or residential burglary, which are more concentrated during the night and early morning. The pattern is consistent with a crime primarily linked to commercial, financial, and digital activities carried out during the population’s usual hours of activity.
Table 4. Time of Day for Fraud Incidents
|
Time |
% |
|
Morning, 6:01 a.m.–12:00 p.m. |
24.1% |
|
Afternoon, 12:01–6:00 p.m. |
49.9% |
|
Night, 6:01 PM–12:00 AM |
16.9% |
|
Early morning, 12:01 a.m.–6:00 a.m. |
4.2% |
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
High Frequency and Significant Economic Impact
Fraud stands out not only for its frequency. It also accounted for the largest total monetary loss among the types of crime disaggregated by ENVIPE.
In 2025, losses related to fraud totaled approximately 66.5 billion pesos, equivalent to about 26.9% of the monetary losses associated with all crimes captured by the survey.
This amount exceeds the losses linked to total vehicle theft—42.0 billion pesos—theft or assault on the street or on public transportation—38.1 billion—and extortion—31.9 billion.
Table 5. Monetary Losses by Major Crimes, 2025
|
Crime |
Losses |
|
Fraud |
66,470 |
|
Total vehicle theft |
42,008 |
|
Theft or robbery on the street or on public transportation |
38,093 |
|
Extortion |
31,919 |
|
Partial vehicle theft |
19,133 |
|
Residential burglary |
17,750 |
|
Threats |
8,683 |
|
Other thefts |
5,032 |
|
Injuries |
4,486 |
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
The average cost or loss associated with fraud was approximately 10,613 pesos per victim. Its enormous aggregate impact, therefore, is not due solely to the amount involved in each incident, but primarily to the widespread nature of the phenomenon among the population.
A Crime Rarely Reported
The spread of fraud contrasts with its low rate of reporting to the criminal justice system. Of the estimated 8.1 million cases of fraud, only 4.8% were reported to the Public Prosecutor’s Office or State Attorney General’s Office.
The underreporting rate reached 96.5%; that is, nearly 97 out of every 100 fraud cases were not reported or, even if reported, did not result in the opening of an investigation file. Among the major crimes measured by ENVIPE, only extortion had a higher underreporting rate, at 97.5%.
Table 6. Underreporting Rate for Major Crimes, 2025
|
Crime |
Unreported figure |
||
|
Extortion |
97.5% |
||
|
Crime |
Unreported figure |
||
|
Fraud |
96.5% |
||
|
Other thefts |
94.4% |
||
|
Partial vehicle theft |
93.5% |
||
|
Theft or robbery on the street or on public transportation |
92.6% |
||
|
Residential burglary |
90.3% |
||
|
Threats |
90.5% |
||
|
Injuries |
86.8% |
||
|
Total vehicle theft |
33.8% |
||
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
Among the cases of fraud that were reported, 73.5% led to the opening of an investigation file. However, at the time of the survey, in 44.6% of the cases, no action had been taken, while 31.8% were still pending. In 14.1% of cases, property had been recovered; in 4.9%, compensation for damages had been provided; and in approximately 0.9%, the person responsible had been brought before a judge or had been granted a pardon.
Table 7. What happens after reporting fraud?
|
Indicator |
% |
|
Fraud reports as a percentage of the total |
4.8% |
|
Of those reported: a case was opened |
73.5% |
|
Outcome of cases opened |
|
|
None |
44.6% |
|
Pending |
31.8% |
|
Assets recovered |
14.1% |
|
Compensation for damages |
4.9% |
|
Held accountable by a judge / pardon granted |
0.9% |
Source: INEGI, ENVIPE 2026,
The “invisible offender”: a methodological peculiarity of fraud
The ENVIPE survey allows for a broad characterization of the individuals responsible for various crimes: number of participants, sex, approximate age, possible alcohol or drug use, and possession of weapons. However, fraud is expressly excluded from these estimates.
The methodological reason cited by INEGI is particularly revealing: the deceptive nature of fraud makes it difficult to identify the characteristics of the person or persons responsible.
This characteristic constitutes, in and of itself, a significant finding. Unlike robberies, assaults, or threats—where the victim can directly observe the perpetrator—a growing proportion of fraud occurs through digital or financial interactions in which the perpetrator can remain anonymous, act remotely, and even be located outside the victim’s geographical vicinity.
Consequently, the rise in fraud also poses a challenge for criminal statistics. Victimization surveys effectively measure the victim’s experience, the method used, the financial loss, and interactions with authorities, but they face greater limitations when it comes to characterizing the perpetrator. The ENVIPE does not capture the characteristics of the perpetrator. This highlights the need to supplement surveys with administrative records, information from the financial sector, and new digital sources to better understand the structures and mechanisms behind these crimes.
Fraud from the Perspective of Perceived Safety
When analyzing the data obtained regarding perceptions, it stands out that despite their higher incidence, fraud offenses are not among the crimes that people believe will happen to them in the coming year. Extortion, on the other hand, is included in that category. Perhaps there is some confusion between different types of crimes. However, further research is needed on this matter.
Where data is available is regarding the question about activities that people stopped doing in the past year. It was found that, nationwide, 12% stopped using online banking or conducting banking activities, while the state where this phenomenon was most prevalent was San Luis Potosí, where 18% did so. At the same time, 24.5% stopped buying or selling through apps, social media, or the internet, with Tabasco having the highest percentage at 33.1%.
Based on these data, it is possible that the rise in fraud is causing people to stop using electronic means due to their fear of becoming victims of fraud. This would indicate that the phenomenon not only results in the loss of material possessions but also affects behavior.
A shift in victimization that demands new responses
The ENVIPE results show that fraud is no longer a secondary category within property crime. Its sustained growth, the predominance of electronic means, its concentration among populations with greater financial and digital interaction, the high aggregate losses, and an underreported rate exceeding 96% constitute a phenomenon with its own distinct characteristics.
This transformation poses challenges that go beyond traditional crime prevention strategies. Reducing victimization from fraud requires strengthening financial and digital literacy, authentication and transaction protection mechanisms, cooperation between authorities and financial institutions, reporting and complaint channels, and the capacity to produce statistics that allow for tracking rapidly changing criminal patterns.
The thematic depth of the ENVIPE survey makes it possible to move precisely in this direction. Beyond estimating how many people were victimized, its tabulated data allow us to reconstruct how the crime occurs, who is most at risk, what harm it causes, and what happens when victims seek institutional support.
Mexico thus has a particularly robust statistical source for analyzing victimization. The ENVIPE’s experience, aligned with the harmonization principles promoted by the Initiative for the Crime Victimization Survey in Latin America and the Caribbean (VICLAC), also contributes to strengthening comparable statistics on security and justice in the region.
For more information