Visa used to police fraud and disputes as two separate problems. Since April 2025 it polices them as one number, and that number now shapes how much patience your acquirer has for your business. The Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program (VAMP) scores every card-not-present merchant and every acquirer portfolio monthly, on counts rather than dollars, against thresholds that tightened again in April 2026.
That design has consequences most coverage misses. A $6 card testing authorization weighs exactly as much as a $6,000 fraud loss. A chargeback you win in August still counted in July. And the chargeback ratio your processor dashboard shows you is not the number Visa is looking at. This guide breaks down the formula, the thresholds, the enforcement mechanics and the levers that actually move your number.
VAMP is count based. The ratio counts TC40 fraud reports plus TC15 disputes against settled card-not-present transactions; transaction size never matters.
The merchant line is 1.5%. From 1 April 2026 the Excessive threshold sits at 1.5% in AP, Canada, the EU and the US, with a 1,500 event monthly minimum.
Enumeration is a second trigger. A 20% enumeration ratio with a 300,000 count floor catches card testing even when your disputes look clean.
Timing decides exclusions. Pre dispute tools and Compelling Evidence 3.0 remove events from the count, but only when resolution lands before Visa pulls the month’s data.
What VAMP Is and What It Replaced
For most of a decade, Visa ran fraud and disputes on separate tracks. The Visa Fraud Monitoring Program (VFMP) watched fraud reports. The Visa Dispute Monitoring Program (VDMP) watched chargebacks. Each had its own thresholds, fines and remediation logic. VAMP retired both on 1 April 2025 and folded them into a single global program, with the consolidated metrics effective 1 June 2025.
At a glance
- Program
- Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program (VAMP)
- Live since
- 1 April 2025, metrics from 1 June 2025
- Scope
- Card-not-present VisaNet transactions, domestic and cross border
- Merchant Excessive line
- 1.5% from 1 April 2026
- Acquirer lines
- 0.5% Above Standard, 0.7% Excessive
- Enumeration trigger
- 20% ratio and 300,000 enumerated transactions
The name is the tell. The A stands for acquirer. Visa’s primary enforcement relationship under VAMP runs through the banks and processors that sponsor merchants, and the portfolio thresholds sit roughly three times lower than the merchant ones. Every acquirer is now an enforcement layer with internal lines stricter than anything Visa publishes. We unpacked what that shift means for high-risk merchants in our analysis of the April 2026 threshold drop.
- 1 Apr 2025
VAMP launches
VDMP and VFMP retire. One program, one ratio, applied to acquirers and merchants.
- 1 Jun 2025
Metrics take effect
The consolidated ratio, thresholds and minimum monthly counts go live.
- 1 Oct 2025
Enforcement begins
The advisory period ends 30 September 2025. Identification starts carrying fees.
- 1 Apr 2026In force
Merchant line tightens
Excessive drops from 2.2% to 1.5% in AP, Canada, the EU and the US.
One scope note: Brazil, Chile and India sit outside the global program for now. Visa has said their programs will be announced separately.
The VAMP Ratio: How Your Score Is Actually Calculated
Merchants search for a VAMP score as if it were a separate metric. There is no score beyond the ratio itself:
The formula
VAMP ratio = (TC40 fraud reports + TC15 disputes) ÷ TC05 settled transactions. All three inputs are counts of card-not-present VisaNet transactions, domestic and cross border. Card present activity is out of scope entirely.
Two exclusions can shrink the numerator, per Visa’s own fact sheet: disputes resolved through pre dispute solutions such as Rapid Dispute Resolution, CDRN and Order Insight, and TC40 fraud that qualifies under Compelling Evidence 3.0. Both carry the same caveat: contingent on the timing of the data extract.
That caveat is the trap. VAMP evaluates each month in isolation. A deflection that completes after Visa pulls the month’s data does not rescue that month. And winning a representment weeks later recovers your revenue, not your ratio. The dispute already counted.
A worked example makes the arithmetic concrete. A subscription merchant settles 400,000 card-not-present transactions in a month. It takes 2,400 TC15 disputes, of which 800 are deflected in time through RDR, and 2,000 TC40 fraud reports, of which 400 qualify under CE 3.0. The counted events are 1,600 plus 1,600.
The visibility gap
You probably cannot see your own numerator. An issuer can file a TC40 on a transaction the cardholder never formally disputes, and a fraud chargeback can count twice, once as the TC40 and again as the TC15. Most processor dashboards show disputes only. If you are not pulling TC40 data through your acquirer, you are estimating your own ratio, and probably underestimating it.
The 2026 Threshold Map: Merchant, Acquirer and Regional Lines
| Entity | Level | VAMP ratio | Monthly minimum |
|---|---|---|---|
| Merchant (AP, Canada, EU, US) | Excessive | ≥1.5% | ≥1,500 fraud + dispute events |
| Merchant (LAC) | Excessive | ≥1.5% | ≥1,500 fraud + dispute events |
| Merchant (CEMEA) | Excessive | ≥2.2% | ≥150 events and ≥USD 75,000 |
| Acquirer portfolio | Above Standard | ≥0.5% | Same regional minimums |
| Acquirer portfolio | Excessive | ≥0.7% | Same regional minimums |
Source: Visa, Acquirer Monitoring Program fact sheet.
Two nuances change how you should read that table.
First, the merchant thresholds formally apply when your acquirer is not itself flagged. Once a portfolio goes Above Standard, remediation pressure lands on the whole book, including merchants whose own numbers are fine. You can be individually compliant and still be a portfolio problem.
Second, the 1,500 event floor means a smaller merchant technically cannot be identified by Visa. Do not relax. Acquirers watch the same ratio without any floor, set internal lines below Visa’s published ones, and act on trajectory rather than breach.
Visa’s published line is 1.5%. The line that terminates accounts is your acquirer’s internal one, and nobody publishes that.
TPE analysis
Enumeration: The Second Ratio That Catches Card Testing
- Enumeration
- Automated card testing: scripted authorization attempts that iterate card numbers, expiry dates and CVV2 values until a combination approves.
The enumeration track uses a different denominator, and that difference is everything. The enumeration ratio divides enumerated authorization attempts, approved and declined, by all authorization attempts, approved and declined.
The enumeration ratio that puts a merchant in scope
Enumerated authorizations ÷ all authorizations, approved and declined, together with a 300,000 monthly count of enumerated transactions. Source: Visa fact sheet.
Declines count. A card testing attack that never settles a single transaction can still trip the threshold, because the metric reads your authorization traffic, not your settled volume. Your dispute ratio can look immaculate while a bot burns through your gateway.
Defenses sit at the edge, not in the dispute queue: velocity limits on attempts per card, IP and BIN range, bot detection ahead of the authorization call, and tight AVS and CVV rules. VAMP explicitly requires acquirers to take proactive steps to keep merchants under the enumeration thresholds, which is why gateways have become quicker to force controls onto merchants under attack.
What Enforcement Looks Like When You Cross a Line
The advisory period ended on 30 September 2025. Since then, identification carries per item fees, assessed on acquirers and routinely passed through to merchants.
Visa’s public fact sheet does not print the fee schedule; the figures above are industry reported by Chargebacks911 and the Merchant Risk Council, and what actually reaches you depends on your acquirer’s pass through terms.
The fees are rarely the real damage. An Excessive flag makes you a portfolio liability, and acquirers move faster than Visa does: reserve increases, volume caps, restrictions on transaction types, and offboarding before the portfolio number degrades. For a high volume merchant the sequence often runs fee notice, reserve hike, termination conversation, all inside a quarter.
The Stay Under Playbook: Managing the Count and the Clock
- Get the real numbers monthly.Pull TC40 and TC15 counts from your acquirer, not just your processor’s dispute dashboard, and compute both ratios yourself.
- Deflect inside the month.Enroll in RDR and network alerts (CDRN, Ethoca) so resolutions land before the data extract. Same month or it did not happen, as far as that month’s ratio is concerned.
- Qualify for Compelling Evidence 3.0.Build order histories that meet the evidence requirements for reason code 10.4 so qualified fraud drops out of the numerator.
- Answer Order Insight lookups.An inquiry resolved at the pre dispute stage never becomes a countable event.
- Kill enumeration at the gateway.Velocity limits, bot defense and BIN blocking protect a ratio your dispute tools never see.
- Fix the root causes.Clear billing descriptors, honest cancellation flows and fast refunds prevent the events no tool can exclude.
- Watch the other network.Mastercard’s SMMP runs a parallel scam focused track; a clean VAMP number does not cover you there.
FAQ
What is a good VAMP ratio for a merchant?
Anything comfortably under 1% keeps distance from the 1.5% Excessive line. But acquirers whose portfolios must stay under 0.5% want merchants materially below that, and many treat somewhere around 0.9% as an internal comfort line.
Does winning a chargeback remove it from my VAMP ratio?
No. Only pre dispute resolutions and qualified Compelling Evidence 3.0 exclusions remove events, and only when they complete before Visa’s data extract. Representment wins recover money, not ratio.
Does VAMP apply to card present transactions?
No. The ratio counts card-not-present VisaNet transactions only, domestic and cross border.
Is the merchant threshold 0.9% or 1.5%?
1.5% from 1 April 2026 in AP, Canada, the EU and the US. The 0.9% figure circulating online traces back to the retired VFMP and VDMP era and does not appear in Visa’s published documentation.
- Visa, “Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program Overview,” fact sheet PDF, 2025.
- Chargebacks911, “Visa Acquirer Monitoring Program: Major Visa Updates in 2026,” program guide, 2026.
- Merchant Risk Council, “Stricter VAMP Ratio Thresholds Are Now in Effect: Here’s How to Stay Compliant,” member blog, 2026.
