E-commerce fraud rates spike 33% in 2016

by Guest Contributor 6 min read March 28, 2017

Florida, Delaware, Oregon and New York were the riskiest states for e-commerce fraud

e-commerce fraudMiami accounted for the most ZIP Codes ranked across shipping and billing fraud.

Where is e-commerce fraud taking place? Everywhere.

Last year we reported that 2016 e-commerce fraud attack rates were on pace to surpass the 2015 totals. At the time, the fraud attack rates for the first half of 2016 appeared to be at least 15% higher than the 2015 total. That percentage turned out to be much higher as e-commerce fraud increased to 33% in 2016 compared to 2015 according to Experian data.

View our e-commerce fraud heat map
See the top 100 riskiest cities in the United States.
Download the list today

Experian analyzed millions of e-commerce transactions from our 2016 client data to identify fraud attack rates for both shipping and billing locations across the United States. The data reveals the increase of e-commerce attacks in 2016, the geographical differences, and whether a credit card has been stolen or personal credentials have been compromised. Fraud attack rates represent the attempted fraudulent e-commerce transactions against the population of overall e-commerce orders.

The 2016 e-commerce fraud attack rate data shows:

  • Miami, FL., is where the riskiest ZIP™ Code comes from for both shipping and billing e-commerce fraud. Miami accounted for 17 of the top 100 ZIP™ Codes for shipping fraud and 20 of the top 100 for billing fraud.
  • 70% of e-commerce billing fraud came from three states – Florida, California and New York – based on the sum of fraud attacks
  • Delaware, Oregon, and Florida were the top-ranked states for billing and shipping e-commerce fraud in 2016
  • Oregon and Delaware saw an increase in e-commerce billing fraud attacks of over 200%.

Many of the higher-risk ZIP™ codes and cities are located near a large port-of-entry city or airport, making them ideal locations for reshipping fraudulent goods. This includes Miami, Houston, New York City, and Los Angeles, perhaps allowing criminals to move stolen goods more effectively. All those cities are ranked among the riskiest cities for both measures of fraud attacks.
.dataTb{margin:20px auto;width:100%}.dataTb:after{clear:both}.dataTb table{}.dataTb td,.dataTb th{border:1px solid #ddd;padding:.8em}.dataTb th{background:#F4F4F4}.tbL{float:left;width:49%}.tbR{float:right;width:49%;margin:0 0 0 2%}

Top 10 riskiest Billing ZIP™ Codes for 2016
33198 Miami, FL
33192 Miami, FL
33195 Miami, FL
33166 Miami, FL
91733 South El Monte, CA
33191 Miami, FL
91746 La Puente, CA
17064 Port Reading, NJ
66025 Eudora, KS
89423 Minden, NV
Source: Experian.com
Top 10 riskiest Shipping ZIP™ Codes for 2016
33198 Miami, FL
33166 Miami, FL
33191 Miami, FL
33195 Miami, FL
77036 Houston, TX
33192 Miami, FL
91733 South El Monte, CA
91746 La Puente, CA
66025 Eudora, KS
62694 Winchester, IL
Source: Experian.com


What is driving credit card fraud trends?

The biggest component of this trend is the fact that 2016 was a record year for data breaches. There were 1,093 data breaches last year, a 40% increase from 2015, according to the Identity Theft Resource Center. The recent Federal Trade Commission (FTC) 2016 Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book, announced a jump in consumers who reported that their stolen data was used for credit card fraud, from 16% in 2015 to more than 32% in 2016. The record number of data breaches is a signal that future fraudulent activities will take place. This is further reflected by the increase of consumers reporting credit card fraud to the FTC in 2016. So far in 2017, that same trend continues as the total number of breaches has increased 56% compared to the same time in 2016.

See our 2016 e-commerce fraud infographic
Compare fraud attack rates — and more — from 2015 to 2016 in our latest infographic.
Download today

Why are there geographical differences in ecommerce fraud?

Most e-commerce merchants have basic controls in place to validate that transaction billing information matches a particular account holder using things like the address verification service. So from a billing or victim perspective, attackers typically leverage the legitimate cardholder billing details in a fraudulent order. In order to maximize successful fraud attacks, they need to make the transaction appear as normal as possible. But from a shipping perspective, those same fraudsters often can’t rely on shipping to the cardholder’s address and trying to intercept the package. To acquire the proceeds of their fraudulent transactions, this is where attackers get creative, often using re-shippers or shipping “mules”, freight forwarders, or delivery addresses that do not raise suspicion but are nearby international ports or airports so the fraudulent order can be quickly picked up and shipped to its final destination (often overseas). That’s why we see such a big disparity between attacks by a victim or billing address being mostly evenly spread across the country vs. shipping attacks, which are mostly concentrated in coastal states with major port cities and airports. Delaware and Oregon are two exceptions to this flattening of victim attacks, as both states saw a more than 200% increase in billing attacks with only modest increases in shipping attacks. From a shipping perspective, 10 states saw at least a 100% increase in fraudulent orders, having a significant impact on the overall population attack rate.
.dataTb{margin:20px auto;width:100%}.dataTb:after{clear:both}.dataTb table{}.dataTb td,.dataTb th{border:1px solid #ddd;padding:.8em}.dataTb th{background:#F4F4F4}.tbL{float:left;width:49%}.tbR{float:right;width:49%;margin:0 0 0 2%}

Top 5 riskiest Billing fraud States
State Fraud Attack Rate
Delaware 69.0
Oregon 65.7
Florida 41.1
New York 28.0
Nevada 27.0
Source: Experian.com
Top 5 riskiest Shipping  fraud States
State Fraud Attack Rate
Delaware 44.8
Oregon 43.2
Florida 34.2
Alaska 26.2
Washington, D.C. 25.8
Source: Experian.com

Has the EMV switch affected fraud ecommerce rates at all?

The increase in e-commerce fraud follows a similar trend pattern from countries that previously rolled out EMV cards – UK, France, Australia, and Canada – that also saw gradual increases in card-not-present fraud. We suspect that the EMV liability switch and increased adoption by merchants of chip-and-pin enabled terminals have had a profound impact on driving up e-commerce attacks. Fraudsters that typically relied on committing counterfeit fraud have shifted their focus to the digital channels where they could have more success.  As more fraud attackers enter a rapidly growing mobile and online commerce space, that makes it even more difficult for merchants to differentiate their good customers from the sophisticated fraud attackers.

Our annual fraud attack rate data brings to light the increase of e-commerce attacks over the last year across the US. This latest data is a strong indicator that other types of fraud have already occurred and can help businesses understand how to better protect themselves and their customers. Whether a credit card has been stolen or personal credentials have been compromised.  Businesses need to expect an increase of e-commerce fraud over time and to be prepared.

If I run an ecommerce business what should I do to prevent fraud attacks like this?

Businesses need to anticipate an increase of e-commerce fraud over time and to be prepared.  The value of employing a multi-layered approach to fraud prevention especially when it comes to authenticating consumers to validate transactions cannot be understated. By looking at all the points of the customer journey, businesses can better protect themselves from fraud, while maintaining a good consumer experience.  Most importantly, having the right fraud solution in place can help businesses prevent losses both in dollars and reputation.

That layered fraud solution should pair transactional data elements with details about the user (and their previous history and behaviors), the device (and how they typically interact with the business and even understanding what the customers are purchasing and how it relates to the overall population of orders. Machine learning and automation are great complements in a holistic hybrid approach that pairs human intelligence and business rules with machine-based recommendations. We highly recommend that organizations partner with fraud experts who have visibility across peer organizations, the challenges facing the industry, and have been instrumental in solving those problems alongside merchants.

Related Posts

Are Fraudsters Building Better Identities Than Your Customers?

Fraudsters are getting surprisingly good at onboarding. Sometimes, better than your customers. Legitimate customers treat onboarding like an errand. They start an application between other tasks, get distracted, forget a password, switch devices, upload a document or come back later to finish. Their digital lives aren’t always linear, because real life isn’t either. Fraudsters approach onboarding differently. For them, opening an account is the objective. Every interaction is designed to increase the odds of success. The difference raises an uncomfortable question hanging over onboarding: What exactly are we rewarding? When smooth becomes suspicious Digital onboarding has traditionally rewarded experiences that feel smooth, consistent and complete. The challenge is that legitimate customers rarely behave that way. Most people approach onboarding somewhere between mildly distracted and mildly annoyed. They pause halfway through because dinner is burning. They reopen an old account only to realize everything is attached to an email they made in college and, somehow, still use for airline receipts. Digital life accumulates history unevenly, because ordinary life does too. Fraudsters have every reason to eliminate those inconsistencies. Applications may be rehearsed. Identity attributes are assembled deliberately. Contact points are prepared in advance. Every interaction is optimized to make the application appear credible. Ironically, the qualities organizations often associate with confidence — clean submissions, steady progression and few corrections — can also describe applications that have been carefully engineered to pass inspection. The challenge isn't that smooth onboarding is meaningless. It's that smooth onboarding, by itself, doesn't tell the whole story. Context changes interpretation A smooth onboarding experience should be the beginning of the evaluation, not the end. Behavior provides important context. How someone moves through an application can reveal whether the experience feels naturally human or unusually orchestrated. Do they interact naturally? Do they hesitate, correct mistakes or navigate in ways that resemble ordinary human behavior? Or does the session appear unusually scripted, automated or repetitive? Identity verification adds another layer. Matching information across trusted sources, validating identity details and strengthening confidence in account creation remain important, particularly when onboarding decisions carry financial, fraud or customer experience consequences. But verification largely answers a point-in-time question: Does this information match right now? A third layer comes from digital history. An inbox attached to years of airline receipts, loyalty accounts, subscription renewals, account recovery, financial notifications and familiar digital routines introduces a different kind of confidence. Legitimate digital identities leave behind patterns of persistence and engagement that develop gradually over time. Fraudsters can assemble convincing identity attributes, but creating years of ordinary digital life is much harder. Building confidence in an identity requires more than verifying information submitted during a single onboarding session. It requires understanding whether the identity reflects a broader history that supports what the application suggests. A multilayered approach builds stronger identity confidence No single signal can provide a complete view of identity risk. Organizations need multiple sources of confidence that reinforce one another. That's the thinking behind our approach: combining behavioral intelligence, identity verification and digital identity continuity into a more complete view of risk. We bring these complementary layers together through: • NeuroID adds behavioral context during onboarding and account creation, helping identify interaction patterns that may indicate automation, manipulation or coordinated fraud. • Precise ID® strengthens identity verification and resolution by comparing applicant information with trusted identity data. • AtData, recently added to our portfolio, contributes email-centered intelligence based on persistence, engagement and long-term digital history. Together, these capabilities help organizations move beyond evaluating a single moment in time to understanding whether an identity is supported by consistent behavior, trusted identity data and an established digital history. The future of fraud prevention isn't about rewarding the smoothest application. It's about recognizing the most trustworthy identity. Fraudsters can rehearse an application. They can optimize an onboarding journey. They can even assemble convincing identity attributes. What they can't easily manufacture is years of ordinary digital life. That's why digital identity continuity has become an important layer of modern fraud prevention. Combined with identity verification and behavioral intelligence, it helps organizations distinguish between identities that simply look convincing and those supported by a history that is much harder to fake. Learn more Contact us

September 2, 2026 by Julie Lee
From Hybrids to Refinancing: Consumers are Finding New Roads to Vehicle Affordability

For today’s automotive consumers, considering a vehicle purchase isn’t just about the price they see on the window, it’s about finding the right combination of their vehicle preference and monthly payment. In fact, data from Experian Automotive’s State of the Automotive Finance Market Report: Q2 2026 highlighted how affordability continues to shape the automotive finance market. For instance, hybrids offered the lowest average new vehicle loan payment across all fuel types, coming in at $646 in Q2 2026, compared to electric vehicles (EVs) at $692, and gasoline-powered vehicles at $721. This led to considerable growth in new vehicle market share for hybrids this quarter, accounting for 16.80%, from 12.99% last year. While the automotive market continues to offer consumers an expanding mix of fuel types, the combination of growing hybrid share and comparatively lower monthly payments is something worth watching. Affordability isn’t just about what consumers drive, it’s how they finance it While hybrid vehicles are continuing to pave their way in the vehicle market, consumers who already have an auto loan are finding greater savings through refinancing. In the second quarter of 2026, automotive refinancing reached approximately 140,000 loans. More notably, the financial benefit associated with refinancing has grown. Consumers who refinanced this quarter reduced their average interest rate by more than 2.4%, with the average rate moving from 10.40% on the original loan to 7.97% on the refinanced loan. Those rate reductions translated into meaningful monthly savings, especially when refinancing through particular lenders. In Q2 2026, refinancing saved consumers an average of $83 per month, compared to an average monthly savings of $64 this time last year. However, credit unions delivered the largest average payment difference among lender types at $102 this quarter, followed by banks ($65), and finance companies ($38). It’s important for automotive professionals to acknowledge that affordability is not a single moment in the vehicle journey. It can influence the vehicle a consumer chooses, the financing they opt for during that transaction, and the decisions they make years after driving off the lot. Understanding and leveraging those different moments can help professionals identify opportunities to better serve consumers throughout the vehicle ownership lifecycle. To learn more about automotive finance trends, view the full State of the Automotive Finance Market Report: Q2 2026 presentation on demand.

August 27, 2026 by Melinda Zabritski
AI Agent Identity Verification: How to Verify AI Agents in Digital Transactions

AI agents are changing the way consumers interact with businesses online. Learn how you can establish greater confidence in AI transactions.

August 26, 2026 by Laura Burrows

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Enter your name and email for the latest updates.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Don't miss out on the latest industry trends and insights!
Subscribe