Google review statistics 2026: reviews, fake reviews and removals

This report brings together 248 statistics on Google reviews, fake reviews, review removals, regulation and business impact from 110 primary sources: Google itself, regulators, academic research, platform transparency reports and consumer surveys. It adds ReviewTactic's own analysis of 369,688 negative Google reviews across 15,954 business profiles. We traced every third-party figure to its original publisher, checked it word for word against the source and graded it (A to C) for source quality. We also list 20 widely repeated statistics that don't hold up, and the questions no one has public data for yet.

Key findings

From ReviewTactic's own data: 24.3% of negative Google reviews break at least one Google content policy. In our analysis of 369,688 negative reviews across 15,954 business profiles, 81.8% of businesses had at least one policy-violating negative review. Spam was the largest category (41.2% of violations); reviews from competitors and other conflicts of interest were rare (0.6%) (ReviewTactic Violation Study, 2026).

1. Google blocked or removed over 292 million policy-violating reviews in 2025, while publishing more than 1 billion reviews (Google, 2026)^[1]. That is more than five times the 55 million it reported for 2020, the first year it used the same "blocked or removed" wording (our calculation from Google's annual figures).
2. Credible estimates of fake reviews range from the single digits to around 20%, not the 30–40% often quoted. Platforms that publish a share report between 3.6% and 7.4% of submissions (Tripadvisor, Trustpilot). The FTC found research estimates "range from the single digits to over twenty percent". The UK government estimates 11% to 15% of reviews in three common product categories are fake. Google publishes no percentage, and the "30–40%" claim has no traceable source.
3. 97% of US consumers read reviews for local businesses (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4], and they now use an average of six review sites. Google is still the leading review source, but its share in the same survey dipped from 83% to 71% in a year.
4. Trust in reviews has fallen. In BrightLocal's 2020 report, 79% of consumers trusted online reviews as much as personal recommendations; in the 2025 report, 42% did. BrightLocal makes this comparison itself, though the question wording has changed between editions.
5. Customers' bar is rising. 68% will only use a business rated four stars or higher (up from 55% a year earlier), 31% only one rated 4.5 or higher (up from 17%), and 47% won't use a business with fewer than 20 reviews (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4].
6. Recency counts. 74% of consumers look for reviews written in the last three months (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4].
7. There is a response gap. 89% of consumers expect owners to respond to reviews (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4]. Yet in a 2026 sample of 229,882 Google reviews, one-star reviews got a reply only 9.8% of the time, and the replies that did come took 19.5 days on average (UENI, 2026, vendor sample)^[5]. One way to close it: AI-drafted review replies you approve before they post.
8. Responding pays. When hotels started responding to reviews, they received 12% more reviews and their ratings rose by 0.12 stars on average (Proserpio and Zervas, Harvard Business Review, 2018)^[6].
9. Fake reviews are now illegal in the US and the UK. The FTC's rule took effect on 21 October 2024, with civil penalties of up to $53,088 per violation. The UK banned fake-review practices from April 2025, with fines of up to 10% of global turnover.
10. AI now sits on both sides of reviews. 45% of US consumers use AI tools such as ChatGPT for local business recommendations, up from 6% a year earlier (BrightLocal, 2026)^[7]. Meanwhile Tripadvisor removed 214,000 AI-generated reviews in 2024.
11. No one publishes review-removal success rates. Google doesn't report what share of flagged reviews it removes, and the removal "success rates" quoted online could not be traced to any dataset.

ReviewTactic data: Google rating benchmarks

Our own analysis of 1,511,957 Google Business Profiles, October 2026. Full tables, charts and method in Google rating benchmarks 2026; the Google review calculator runs the same math on your own rating.

• In a ReviewTactic analysis of 1,511,957 rated Google Business Profiles (October 2026), the median rating was 4.6, and the middle half of businesses sat between 4.2 and 4.9.
• Among 198,955 Google Business Profiles with fewer than 10 reviews, 61.3% showed a perfect 5.0 (ReviewTactic, October 2026).
• Among 342,662 Google Business Profiles with 500 or more reviews, only 1.9% held a perfect 5.0 (ReviewTactic, October 2026).
• 35.2% of 1,511,957 rated Google Business Profiles were rated 4.8 or higher; among profiles with 500 or more reviews, the share fell to 13.4% (ReviewTactic, October 2026).
• One new 1-star review moves a Google average by less than 0.05 once a business has 66 reviews at a 4.3 average, 72 at 4.6 or 78 at 4.9 (ReviewTactic calculation, October 2026).

How many reviews does Google remove?

Google blocked or removed over 292 million policy-violating reviews in 2025, and the figure has grown every year since 2020. Google's own wording matters here: most of these reviews are blocked before they are ever published. In its 2024 report Google said "the vast majority" were removed before anyone saw them. So the total is not a count of reviews pulled down from live business profiles. If a review on your own profile breaks a rule, here is how to get a Google review removed.

Policy-violating reviews blocked or removed by Google, by year

Note: the 2019 figure uses "removed" and every later year uses "blocked or removed", so the 2019 comparison is directional. Google doesn't express any of these figures as a share of all submissions. Our 2020→2025 multiple (more than 5×) compares two years with identical wording.

Beyond reviews, Google reports:

• Fake Business Profiles. 4 million removed in 2019; nearly 3 million in 2020; more than 7 million removed in 2021, plus more than 12 million creation attempts stopped; 20 million creation attempts stopped in 2022; more than 12 million removed or blocked in both 2023 and 2024; over 13 million removed in 2025.
• Accounts. More than 475,000 user accounts disabled in 2019, more than 610,000 in 2020 and more than 1 million in 2021. Posting restrictions went on more than 900,000 accounts in 2024 and more than 782,000 in 2025.
• Edits to business information. More than 100 million edits blocked from going live in 2021, more than 70 million policy-violating edits blocked or removed in 2024, and 79 million inaccurate or unverified edits blocked in 2025.
• Organized fraud. In 2023, Google's algorithm identified over five million fake review attempts linked to a single scam network within weeks. In June 2023, Google sued a bad actor over more than 350 fraudulent Business Profiles and more than 14,000 fake reviews (Google)^[14].
• Exposure. Google said in 2020 that policy-violating content is seen less than 1% of the time on Maps.

New protections (2025–2026). In the US, UK and India, Google now alerts users when suspicious five-star reviews have recently been removed from a business (Google, 2025)^[13]. A profile found to have fake or incentivised reviews may be unable to receive new reviews "for a set period of time" and may show a warning that fake reviews were removed (Google Business Profile Help)^[15]. Google publishes no fixed duration. In 2026, Google added Gemini models to catch harmful profile edits and systems that "detect specific scam patterns", including review extortion, before posts go live (Google, 2026)^[1]. What these changes mean for business owners is covered in the 2026 Google review purge.

Are Google reviews fake? How many online reviews are fake

Some are, but far fewer than the viral claims suggest. Google blocked or removed over 292 million policy-violating reviews in 2025, most of them before they were published, while publishing more than 1 billion. Google doesn't publish a fake share. Where platforms do, fake or fraudulent reviews make up 3.6% to 7.4% of submissions, and regulators' reviews of the research put estimates between the single digits and around 20%. The volumes are still very large: Amazon alone blocked more than 275 million suspected fake reviews in 2024. If you think you've been hit by one, here is how to report a fake Google review.

What the platforms themselves report

How to read this: "not recommended" (Yelp) and "removed" are moderation decisions, not findings that a review was fake. Only Tripadvisor and Trustpilot state a fraudulent or fake share of submissions.

Regulator and academic estimates

• Reviewing the research for its 2024 rule, the US Federal Trade Commission noted that estimates of fake or manipulated reviews "range from the single digits to over twenty percent", and that approximately ten percent of products or businesses have some manipulated consumer reviews (FTC final rule, Federal Register, 2024)^[23].
• The UK government estimates that 11% to 15% of all reviews in three common product categories (consumer electronics, home and kitchen, sports and outdoors) are fake (UK government, 2023)^[24]. It puts the harm to UK consumers from fake review text on products alone at £50 million to £312 million a year (GOV.UK)^[25].
• The Transparency Company estimated that 8.5% of published consumer reviews are fake, as cited by the FTC (Federal Register, 2023)^[26].
• Yelp's filter flags roughly 16% of restaurant reviews as suspicious (Luca and Zervas, "Fake It Till You Make It", Harvard)^[27]. Filtered does not mean proven fake.
• The UK's competition regulator (CMA) puts the annual UK consumer spending potentially influenced by online reviews at £23 billion (CMA, 2025)^[28].

The fake-review economy

• Fake review broker packages sued by Amazon in 2023 were priced from $7.99 to $6,999 (Amazon)^[29].
• In 2022 Amazon sued the administrators of more than 10,000 Facebook groups, one of which had more than 43,000 members (Amazon)^[30].
• Which? found 14 Facebook groups trading Amazon, Google and Trustpilot reviews with more than 62,000 members. It also found nearly 17,000 members in groups trading Google reviews, including sales of Local Guide accounts (Which?, 2023)^[31]. For the business on the buying side, see what happens when you buy Google reviews.
• Review boosting made up 54% of Tripadvisor's detected fraud in 2024. 360,000 removed reviews were linked to employee incentive programmes, and about 9,000 businesses were warned for incentivised reviews (Tripadvisor 2025 Transparency Report, via Hotel Online).
• Yelp placed 120 Compensated Activity Alerts and 427 Suspicious Review Activity Alerts on business pages in 2024 (Yelp)^[32].

ReviewTactic data: how many negative Google reviews break the rules

This is the report's original-data layer. On 6 September 2026 we classified 369,688 negative Google reviews (1 to 3 stars) across 15,954 business profiles against Google's content-policy categories (full study and methodology).

• 24.3% of negative reviews broke at least one Google content policy (89,694 of 369,688).
• 81.8% of business profiles had at least one policy-violating negative review, and only 4.0% had exactly one.
• Spam was the largest category at 41.2% of violations. Offensive content, hate speech, harassment and profanity together made up 33.8%.
• Conflicts of interest, such as reviews from competitors, were rare at 0.6%.
• The lower the rating, the higher the rate: 25.0% of 1-star reviews were flagged, against 12.9% of 2-star and 9.3% of 3-star reviews.

Limits: these are businesses that ran a free ReviewTactic scan, so they went looking for problems; they are not a random sample of Google. A scan reads about 23 negative reviews per profile, so counts are minimums. Flags come from a classifier, and Google makes the final removal decision.

If reviews like these sit on your own profile, our review removal service files the reports and appeals for you. Google makes the final call on every one.

AI-generated reviews

Platforms now remove them at scale: Tripadvisor removed 214,000 AI-generated reviews in 2024, and Yelp's automated systems filtered out nearly 500,000 suspected AI-generated reviews (Yelp 2025 Trust & Safety Report)^[22]. Estimates of how common they are vary widely, because they come from different AI detectors run on different samples:

• 19% of sampled Google reviews from 2024 were likely AI-generated, up from 12.21% in 2023 and 5.01% in 2019 (Originality.ai, vendor detector; study)^[33]. The sample covers 15 North American cities and up to five reviews per location; the total sample size isn't stated.
• 909 of 30,000 front-page reviews (3%) on 500 best-selling Amazon products were AI-generated with high confidence, and 74% of those were five-star (Pangram, vendor detector; study)^[34].
• Generative-AI use was associated with 15.5% fewer "useful" votes on Yelp reviews (Northeastern University, 2024)^[35].
• The FTC's rule explicitly covers AI-generated fake reviews (see the laws section).

Treat AI-review prevalence figures as directional. AI detectors produce false positives, and none of these studies is a platform's own measurement. For the signs that give a fake review away, AI-written or not, see how to fight fake Google reviews.

How consumers use and trust Google reviews

Almost everyone reads reviews: 97% of US consumers read them for local businesses, and 41% "always" do, up from 29% a year earlier (BrightLocal, 2026, n=1,002)^[4]. Trust in reviews is lower than it was, though, and customers' standards are higher.

Where people read reviews

• Consumers use an average of six review sites (BrightLocal, 2026).
• Google remains the leading review source, but its share dipped from 83% (2025) to 71% (2026) in BrightLocal's survey.
• 26% of Gen Z consumers use social media platforms as their main method for local search (BrightLocal, 2025)^[36].
• 45% of US consumers use AI tools such as ChatGPT for local business recommendations, up from 6% the year before (BrightLocal, 2026)^[7].

What it takes to be chosen (BrightLocal, 2026)

• 68% will only use a business with four or more stars (55% in 2025).
• 31% will only use a business with 4.5 stars or more (17% in 2025).
• 47% won't use a business with fewer than 20 reviews.
• 74% look for reviews written in the last three months, and 32% for reviews from the last two weeks (20% in 2025).
• 85% say positive reviews make them more likely to use a business; 77% say negative reviews make them less likely.
• In 2024, 71% said they would not consider a business rated below three stars (BrightLocal, 2024)^[37].

To see how far you are from four or 4.5 stars, the star rating calculator works out how many 5-star reviews you need. For rating, volume and recency together, run a free review audit.

Perfect isn't best. Purchase likelihood typically peaks at ratings between 4.0 and 4.7 and falls as ratings approach 5.0 (Spiegel Research Center, Northwestern, 2017, product reviews)^[38]. 46% of shoppers say they are suspicious of products with perfect five-star ratings (PowerReviews, 2021, vendor survey)^[39].

Trust in online reviews, as measured by BrightLocal

Sources: BrightLocal Local Consumer Review Survey, editions 2014–2026 (US). The question wording changed over the years, most visibly around 2021 and again in 2026. BrightLocal's own 2025 report contrasts 42% with 79% in 2020. Read the long-run fall as directional, not exact.

Other consumer findings

• 97% of consumers who read reviews also read business owners' responses (BrightLocal, 2019)^[40].
• 82% of US adults at least sometimes read online reviews before buying something for the first time, and 54% of review readers pay more attention to extremely negative reviews (Pew Research Center, 2016, n=4,787)^[41].
• 94% of consumers say a bad review has convinced them to avoid a business (ReviewTrackers, 2022, vendor survey, methodology not published)^[42].
• 45% of shoppers won't buy a product if it has no ratings or reviews (PowerReviews, 2023, n=8,153)^[43].

Why Google reviews matter: the business impact in numbers

More clicks. In BrightLocal's study, listings with five stars earned 69% of clicks from Google's Local Pack, and going from a three-star to a five-star rating got a business 25% more clicks (BrightLocal, 2017, n=6,283 consumers)^[44].

More revenue. A one-star increase in Yelp rating leads to a 5–9% increase in revenue. The effect is driven by independent restaurants, while ratings do not affect chain restaurants (Luca, Harvard Business School, Washington State revenue data)^[45]. More on how Google reviews affect restaurant revenue.

Higher prices. In Cornell's hotel research, a one-point rise in review score (on a five-point scale) let a hotel raise its price by 11.2% without losing occupancy or market share. A 1% increase in a hotel's online reputation score led to an increase of up to 0.89% in price and up to 1.42% in revenue per available room (Cornell, 2012)^[46].

Fuller restaurants. An extra half-star on Yelp causes restaurants to sell out 19 percentage points (49%) more frequently (Anderson and Magruder, 2012, regression-discontinuity study, San Francisco)^[47].

More revenue for small businesses (Womply, 2019; data from more than 200,000 US small businesses; via a repost of Womply's release on MarTech Series, vendor study)^[48]:

• Businesses that reply to at least 25% of their reviews averaged 35% more revenue than the average business.
• Businesses with more than nine fresh reviews earned 52% more revenue.
• Businesses with an average Google rating of 1 to 1.5 stars averaged 33% less revenue per year.
• The revenue sweet spot was between 3.5 and 4.5 stars.

Bad reviews weigh more than good ones. In online book sales, the fall in sales from a negative review was larger than the rise from a positive one (NBER, 2004)^[49]. Moderately positive reviews can be more persuasive than glowing ones (Kupor and Tormala, Harvard Business Review, 2018)^[50].

About the 270% figure. Purchase likelihood for a product with five reviews is 270% greater than for one with no reviews (Spiegel Research Center, 2017)^[38]. That comes from e-commerce product reviews. It's often quoted about local businesses, which the study did not measure.

Rankings. Google says that more reviews and positive ratings can help a business's local ranking (Google Business Profile Help)^[51]. In Whitespark's 2026 survey of local search experts, high numerical Google ratings ranked #6 among Local Pack factors, the quantity of native Google reviews with text #9 and review recency #11. Owner responses to most reviews ranked #122 (Whitespark, 2026; an opinion survey of local search experts, not a causal study)^[52]. The takeaway: responses mainly work on customers, while ratings, volume and recency carry the ranking weight. See our breakdown of Google review ranking factors and the steps to improve your Google Maps ranking.

Responding to reviews: what customers expect and what businesses do

Customers expect replies within days. Businesses answer negative reviews rarely and slowly. The gap is widest exactly where it matters most.

What customers expect

• 89% of consumers expect business owners to respond to reviews (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4].
• 81% expect a response within a week, and 19% expect one the same day (BrightLocal, 2026)^[4].
• 80% are likely to use a business that responds to all its reviews, 42% are unlikely to use one that never replies, and 50% are unlikely to choose one that gives generic, templated responses (BrightLocal, 2026).
• In 2024, 88% said they would use a business that responds to both positive and negative reviews, against 47% for one that doesn't respond at all (BrightLocal, 2024)^[37].
• 56% say a business's responses to reviews have changed their view of it (Podium, 2021, n=1,543)^[53].

What businesses actually do

• In a sample of 229,882 Google reviews, five-star reviews got a reply 29.3% of the time and one-star reviews 9.8% of the time. When owners did answer a one-star review, they took 19.5 days on average (UENI, 2026, reviews of UENI-connected businesses; vendor sample)^[5].
• 75% of small businesses didn't respond to any reviews (Womply, 2019, vendor study).

Why it matters. When hotels started responding to reviews, they received 12% more reviews and their ratings rose by an average of 0.12 stars. About a third of the hotels studied raised their rounded rating by half a star or more within six months of their first response (Proserpio and Zervas, Harvard Business Review, 2018)^[6]. For the replies that matter most, see how to respond to bad reviews, or draft one with the free AI review response generator.

Are fake reviews illegal? Laws and enforcement

United States

• The FTC announced its final rule banning fake reviews and testimonials on 14 August 2024 (a 5–0 vote). It was published in the Federal Register on 22 August 2024 and took effect on 21 October 2024 (Federal Register)^[54].
• The rule prohibits fake or false reviews, including AI-generated reviews and reviews by people with no real experience of the business. It also bans payment conditioned on a review expressing a particular sentiment, undisclosed insider reviews, company-controlled "independent" review sites, review suppression, and buying or selling fake social media indicators (FTC)^[55]. Our guide to the FTC fake-review rules covers what businesses can still do.
• Maximum civil penalty: $53,088 per violation, effective 17 January 2025 (FTC)^[56]. The 2025 levels continue to apply in 2026 (Federal Register, 2026)^[57].
• The FTC estimated that better-informed purchase decisions under the rule would bring consumer welfare gains of $6.64 billion to $17.52 billion a year (FTC final rule)^[58].
• On 22 December 2025, FTC staff sent warning letters to 10 companies about possible violations of the rule (FTC)^[59].
• The Consumer Review Fairness Act bars form-contract terms that restrict or penalise honest reviews. The FTC and state attorneys general enforce it (FTC)^[60].

United Kingdom

• Fake and misleading review practices became banned practices in April 2025 under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act. Fines can reach 10% of global turnover (CMA, 2026)^[61]. The Act lists "submitting, or commissioning another person to submit or write" a fake consumer review, or one that conceals it was incentivised, as a banned practice (DMCC Act 2024, Schedule 20)^[62].
• On 24 January 2025, Google gave the CMA undertakings on fake reviews. They include banning repeat fake-review posters and adding warning alerts to profiles of businesses boosted by fake reviews (CMA)^[63]. Amazon gave similar undertakings on 6 June 2025.
• On 27 March 2026, the CMA opened investigations into five more businesses, bringing the total under investigation to 14 (CMA)^[61].

European Union

• In an EU-wide screening of 223 websites, published in January 2022, authorities could not confirm in 144 cases that traders were doing enough to ensure reviews are authentic. They concluded that at least 55% of the checked websites potentially violate the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive (European Commission, 2022)^[64].

Germany

• In Germany, Google Maps now shows users how many reviews of a business were removed after defamation complaints in the past 365 days, in ranges up to "over 250" (Google)^[65]. Reviewers can appeal a removal with proof of a real experience (Google)^[66]. In the US, the test is different; see when a negative review is defamation.

Google's own rules. Google's Maps policy prohibits offering incentives such as payment, discounts or free goods in exchange for reviews. It also prohibits discouraging negative reviews and posting contributions in unusual volumes or patterns meant to manipulate a rating (Google)^[67].

Reviews by industry

Below are the sectors with the strongest published data. Our industry pages cover how reviews work in each one.

Healthcare

• 83% of patients go online to read reviews about a provider after receiving a referral, and 84% would not see a referred provider rated below four stars (Press Ganey, 2021, n=1,140)^[68].
• Consumers read an average of 4.7 reviews before choosing a provider, and 84.7% say their own care experience mirrored the reviews they read (Press Ganey, 2024, n=1,000)^[69].

Practices with patient reviews that break Google's rules can see how review removal for healthcare works.

Hotels and travel

• 81% of travellers always or frequently read reviews before booking a place to stay, 79% are more likely to book a hotel with a higher rating, 52% would never book a hotel with no reviews, and 78% focus on the most recent reviews. Tripadvisor users read an average of nine reviews before booking a hotel or restaurant (Tripadvisor and Ipsos MORI, 2019, n=23,292 Tripadvisor users in 12 markets)^[70].
• A one-point rise in review score lets a hotel raise its price by 11.2% without losing occupancy (Cornell, 2012)^[46].
• Tripadvisor's automated screening approved 87.8% of 2024 submissions, rejected 7.3% and flagged 4.9% for human review (Tripadvisor 2025 Transparency Report, via Hotel Online).

Hotels and other hospitality businesses can see how review management for hospitality works.

Car buying

• 75% of 2025 car buyers researched on third-party websites (70% of new-car buyers, 77% of used-car buyers), compared with 59% who used dealership websites. 12% used AI sites in their research (Cox Automotive, 2026, n=2,300 recent buyers)^[71].

Dealerships with reviews that break Google's rules can see how review removal for car dealers works.

Google Maps, AI and reviews

Reviews have become the raw material that AI answers are built from.

• Google Maps has more than 2 billion users a month and lists 250 million businesses and places (Google, 2025)^[72]. In 2026 Google said Maps analyses information on more than 300 million places.
• More than 500 million people contribute reviews, photos and ratings to Maps (Google, 2025)^[72]. The community shared over 1 billion reviews in 2025 alone (Google, 2026)^[1].
• Google launched Gemini-written review summaries in Maps in the US in October 2024 (Google)^[73]. In March 2026 it rolled out "Ask Maps", conversational answers that draw on reviews from its 500 million contributors, in the US and India (Google)^[74].
• AI Mode in Google Search passed 1 billion monthly users a year after launch (Google, 2026)^[75].
• 45% of US consumers now use AI tools for local business recommendations (BrightLocal, 2026)^[7].

What customers write in reviews increasingly becomes the summary an AI shows the next customer. That makes review content, not just star ratings, part of how a business gets described. We cover what that means in reviews and generative engine optimization. To see where you show up on the map today, try the free local rank checker.

Zombie statistics: numbers that don't hold up

These figures circulate widely in articles and AI answers. Each one fails on at least one count: no traceable source, out of date, or a real number used for something it never measured.

What nobody knows yet

The public record has real gaps:

1. Review-removal success rates. Google doesn't publish what share of reported or appealed reviews it removes, and no independent dataset exists.
2. A fake-review share for Google. Google reports totals blocked or removed, not a share of submissions. We found no third-party study that measures what share of negative Google reviews break Google's content policies. ReviewTactic's figure (24.3%, among businesses that ran a scan) is the only one we could find.
3. AI-generated reviews on Google. The only estimates come from vendor AI detectors.
4. How long Google restrictions last. Google says "a set period of time".
5. How businesses respond at scale. The only data is from vendor samples.

Future editions will add first-party data where it can be measured directly.

Methodology

Scope. Statistics on Google reviews and online reviews generally: consumer behaviour, fake and AI-generated reviews, review moderation and removal, regulation, business impact, and industry-specific findings. We preferred 2023–2026 sources and included older research where it remains the reference study, marked with its year.

Primary sources only. Every statistic was traced to its original publisher: Google, a regulator or government body, an academic paper, a platform's own transparency report, or the survey publisher. Articles that repeat a statistic were used only to find the original. Where a publisher's own page couldn't be reached but a verbatim repost of its press release could, we used the repost and name it (Tripadvisor's 2025 report via Hotel Online; Womply's 2019 study via MarTech Series).

Verification. For each statistic we recorded the exact sentence from the source, its publication date, geography and sample. We then re-downloaded every source page and automatically matched the quoted sentence and number against the page text. No AI summarisation was involved in that check. Statistics that failed it were excluded until confirmed.

Grading.

• A: regulator or government publication, a platform's first-party disclosure, or academic research (114 statistics).
• B: research with a published methodology and a sample of 1,000 or more (108).
• C: a vendor study with partial methodology or a smaller sample (26).
• Numbers we couldn't trace are not used, and are listed under zombie statistics instead (20).

Calculations. Where we compare figures (for example, the 2020→2025 growth multiple), we say "our calculation". We don't compute a fake-review share for Google, because Google's published totals are floors ("over", "more than"), so any ratio would overstate precision.

Limitations. Survey figures are self-reported, and most consumer surveys here cover the US only. Vendor studies may have a commercial interest. Google's annual reports don't always cover the same categories each year, and its 2019 wording differs from later years.

First-party data. The ReviewTactic figures come from our own classification of 369,688 negative Google reviews across 15,954 business profiles that ran a free ReviewTactic scan, measured on 6 September 2026. They are labelled as ReviewTactic data wherever they appear and are not graded alongside third-party sources. The full methodology and limits are in the violation study.

How this report was made. Automated research and writing tools located candidate statistics, traced each one to its original source and drafted the text. Every figure was then checked against its source by a deterministic text match (for PDFs, against the extracted document text), and anything that failed was left out. Tamas Magda directed the research and is responsible for the content; Adam Palicz reviewed it.

Disclosure. ReviewTactic provides review management and review-removal services, and both authors have a financial interest in the company. We included research published by companies in the same market wherever it met the grading bar.

Updates. This report is updated annually. Corrections: hello@reviewtactic.com.

Download. The full dataset is available as a CSV file: 248 third-party statistics plus 7 ReviewTactic first-party figures, each with its verbatim quote, source, publisher, date, geography, sample and grade.

Changelog

• 14 October 2026: added ReviewTactic's own Google rating benchmarks (1.51 million profiles) at the top, rewrote the FAQ around the questions people search for, and replaced the product call to action with a link to our free scan.
• 6 October 2026: first published.

Cite this report

Palicz, A., & Magda, T. (2026). Google review statistics 2026: Reviews, fake reviews and removals. ReviewTactic. https://reviewtactic.com/resources/google-review-statistics/

@techreport{palicz2026googlereviewstats,
  author      = {Palicz, Adam and Magda, Tamas},
  title       = {Google Review Statistics 2026: Reviews, Fake Reviews and Removals},
  institution = {ReviewTactic},
  year        = {2026},
  url         = {https://reviewtactic.com/resources/google-review-statistics/}
}

When quoting a single figure, please cite the original source listed below, and link to this page as the compilation. The full dataset is a free CSV download. The rating benchmark tables are separate CSVs on the Google rating benchmarks page.

Related resources

Sources and references

Every statistic above links to its primary source. Sources are numbered in the order they first appear.

1. Google, “New ways we’re protecting businesses on Maps”, 2026. blog.google ↩
2. Tripadvisor, “Review Transparency Report 2021” (2020 data), 2021. tripadvisor.shorthandstories.com ↩
3. Trustpilot, “Trust Report 2025” (2024 data), 2025. corporate.trustpilot.com ↩
4. BrightLocal, “Local Consumer Review Survey 2026”, 2026. brightlocal.com ↩
5. UENI, “How Do Small Businesses Respond to Google Reviews? We Analyzed 229,882 to Find Out”, 2026. ueni.com ↩
6. Proserpio and Zervas, Harvard Business Review, “Study: Replying to Customer Reviews Results in Better Ratings”, 2018. hbr.org ↩
7. BrightLocal, “Local Consumer Review Survey 2026” (AI and trust findings), 2026. brightlocal.com ↩
8. Google, “Google Maps 101: How contributed content makes Maps helpful”, 2020. blog.google ↩
9. Google, “Google Maps 101: How we tackle fake and fraudulent contributed content”, 2021. blog.google ↩
10. Google, “How we kept information on Maps reliable in 2021”, 2022. blog.google ↩
11. Google, “How Google Maps uses machine learning to fight fake contributions”, 2023. blog.google ↩
12. Google, “How machine learning keeps contributed content helpful”, 2024. blog.google ↩
13. Google, “Google Maps uses AI to fight fake Business Profiles”, 2025. blog.google ↩
14. Google, “Google takes legal action to stop fake review scams”, 2023. blog.google ↩
15. Google Business Profile Help, “Business Profile restrictions for policy violations”. support.google.com ↩
16. Amazon, “3 steps Amazon is taking to stop fake reviews”, 2023. aboutamazon.com ↩
17. Amazon, “Amazon and the Better Business Bureau file a joint lawsuit to fight fake reviews”, 2024. aboutamazon.com ↩
18. Amazon, “Amazon’s latest actions against fake review brokers”, 2025. aboutamazon.com ↩
19. Tripadvisor, “Review Transparency Report 2023” (2022 data), 2023. tripadvisor.mediaroom.com ↩
20. Tripadvisor, “2025 Transparency Report” (2024 data), as republished by Hotel Online, 2025. hotel-online.com ↩
21. Trustpilot, “Trust at Trustpilot” (2025 figures). corporate.trustpilot.com ↩
22. Yelp, “2025 Trust & Safety Report”, 2026. yelp-press.com ↩
23. US Federal Trade Commission, “Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials” (final rule), Federal Register, 2024. govinfo.gov ↩
24. UK Department for Business and Trade, “Fake online reviews research: executive summary”, 2023. gov.uk ↩
25. UK Department for Business and Trade, “Investigating the prevalence and impact of fake reviews”, 2023. gov.uk ↩
26. US Federal Trade Commission, “Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials” (proposed rule, citing The Transparency Company), Federal Register, 2023. federalregister.gov ↩
27. Luca and Zervas, “Fake It Till You Make It: Reputation, Competition, and Yelp Review Fraud”, Management Science, 2016. dash.harvard.edu ↩
28. UK Competition and Markets Authority, “Amazon gives undertakings to CMA to curb fake reviews”, 2025. gov.uk ↩
29. Amazon, “Amazon’s latest actions against fake review brokers” (2023 edition), 2024. aboutamazon.com ↩
30. Amazon, “Amazon targets fake review fraudsters on social media”, 2022. press.aboutamazon.com ↩
31. Which?, “Facebook still infiltrated by fake review factories”, 2023. which.co.uk ↩
32. Yelp, “2024 Trust & Safety Report”, 2025. yelp-press.com ↩
33. Originality.ai, “From 2019 to 2024: AI-generated Google reviews increase” (vendor study), 2025. originality.ai ↩
34. Pangram Labs, “AI-generated reviews on Amazon” (vendor study), 2026. pangram.com ↩
35. Northeastern University, “New study finds ChatGPT makes user-submitted content worse”, 2024. ai.northeastern.edu ↩
36. BrightLocal, “Consumer Search Behavior study”, 2025. brightlocal.com ↩
37. BrightLocal, “Local Consumer Review Survey 2024”, 2024. brightlocal.com ↩
38. Spiegel Research Center, Northwestern University (Medill), “How Online Reviews Influence Sales”, 2017. spiegel.medill.northwestern.edu ↩
39. PowerReviews, “Survey: The Ever-Growing Power of Reviews”, 2021. powerreviews.com ↩
40. BrightLocal, “Local Consumer Review Survey 2019”, 2019. brightlocal.com ↩
41. Pew Research Center, “Online Reviews”, 2016. pewresearch.org ↩
42. ReviewTrackers, “Online Reviews Statistics and Trends (2022 report)”, 2022. reviewtrackers.com ↩
43. PowerReviews, “The Ever-Growing Power of Reviews (2023 edition)”, 2023. powerreviews.com ↩
44. BrightLocal, “Impact of star ratings on click-through rates (review search click-through study)”, 2017. brightlocal.com ↩
45. Harvard Business School (Michael Luca), Working Paper 12-016, “Reviews, Reputation, and Revenue: The Case of Yelp.com”, 2011. hbs.edu ↩
46. Cornell Center for Hospitality Research (Chris K. Anderson), “The Impact of Social Media on Lodging Performance”, 2012. ecommons.cornell.edu ↩
47. Anderson and Magruder, “Does Yelp affect restaurant demand?”, ARE Update, UC Giannini Foundation (summary of their Economic Journal paper). giannini.ucop.edu ↩
48. Womply, study on online reviews and small-business revenue (press release, as republished by MarTech Series), 2019. martechseries.com ↩
49. Chevalier and Mayzlin, “The Effect of Word of Mouth on Sales: Online Book Reviews”, NBER Digest, 2004. nber.org ↩
50. Kupor and Tormala, Harvard Business Review, “Research: Glowing Reviews Aren’t Always the Most Persuasive”, 2018. hbr.org ↩
51. Google Business Profile Help, “Read and reply to reviews”. support.google.com ↩
52. Whitespark, “Local Search Ranking Factors 2026”, 2025. whitespark.ca ↩
53. Podium, “2021 Small Business Online Review Trends Report”, 2021. podium.com ↩
54. Federal Register, “Trade Regulation Rule on the Use of Consumer Reviews and Testimonials”, 2024. federalregister.gov ↩
55. US Federal Trade Commission, “Federal Trade Commission announces final rule banning fake reviews and testimonials”, 2024. ftc.gov ↩
56. US Federal Trade Commission, “FTC publishes inflation-adjusted civil penalty amounts for 2025”, 2025. search.ftc.gov ↩
57. Federal Register, “Civil Penalty Inflation Adjustments” (FTC), 2026. federalregister.gov ↩
58. US Federal Trade Commission, final rule on consumer reviews and testimonials (PDF), 2024. ftc.gov ↩
59. US Federal Trade Commission, “FTC warns 10 companies about possible violations of the agency’s new consumer review rule”, 2025. ftc.gov ↩
60. US Federal Trade Commission, “Consumer Review Fairness Act: What Businesses Need to Know”. ftc.gov ↩
61. UK Competition and Markets Authority, “Fake and misleading reviews: 5 businesses under CMA investigation”, 2026. gov.uk ↩
62. Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act 2024, Schedule 20, legislation.gov.uk. legislation.gov.uk ↩
63. UK Competition and Markets Authority, “CMA secures important changes from Google to tackle fake reviews”, 2025. gov.uk ↩
64. European Commission, consumer protection sweeps: online reviews screening, 2022. commission.europa.eu ↩
65. Google Maps Contribution Policy Help, “Defamation removal notices in Germany”. support.google.com ↩
66. Google Legal Help Center, “Appealing a removed review in Germany”. support.google.com ↩
67. Google Maps Contribution Policy Help, “Prohibited and restricted content”. support.google.com ↩
68. Press Ganey, 2021 Consumer Experience Trends in Healthcare (press release), 2021. pressganey.com ↩
69. Press Ganey, “Healthcare provider reviews drive patient choice”, 2024. pressganey.com ↩
70. Tripadvisor, “Online reviews remain a trusted source of information when booking trips, reveals new research” (with Ipsos MORI), 2019. tripadvisor.mediaroom.com ↩
71. Cox Automotive, “2025 Car Buyer Journey Study”, 2026. coxautoinc.com ↩
72. Google, “Google Maps celebrates 20 years with 20 favorite features”, 2025. blog.google ↩
73. Google, “Google Maps updates: Gemini arrives, Immersive View expands and more”, 2024. blog.google ↩
74. Google, “Ask Maps and Immersive Navigation: New AI features in Google Maps”, 2026. blog.google ↩
75. Google, “Google Search’s I/O 2026 updates”, 2026. blog.google ↩