Romance scam statistics

What the 2023 totals include

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reported 64,003 romance-scam reports to its Consumer Sentinel Network in 2023. Reported losses totaled $1.14 billion. These are records people or data contributors sent to a reporting system, not a national count of every attempted or completed scam. Many experiences never reach the agency. The reports are allegations and can include different details. Do not divide the report total by all dating-app users to create an app 'scam rate'; the numerator and denominator do not describe the same group.

The year belongs beside every number. This article's main report and loss totals are for 2023, while the contact-method rows come from separate FTC analyses of 2022 and 2025 loss reports. A person searching for a current live counter will not find one in these sources. The table is a dated record of what the agency received. That is useful for seeing the scale of reported harm, as long as the unreported part stays unknown rather than being quietly treated as zero.

What the $2,000 median says

The FTC's $2,000 figure is the median reported loss per person in its 2023 romance-scam summary. Put individual reported losses in order and the median is the middle one. It is not the average of all reported losses, and it is not the amount a typical dating-app user loses. The $1.14 billion total adds reported losses across the relevant records. A large total and a smaller median can coexist because the distribution includes some much larger reported losses.

Do not multiply the median by the 64,003 reports to try to reconstruct the total. The median is a middle value, not an amount assigned to every report, and not all reports have identical loss information. The FTC's figures are already the appropriate published measures. The distinction matters when a headline uses the large total to frighten one reader or uses the median to minimize harm. Both describe what was reported in the agency's 2023 data, with different jobs.

Contact-method findings have different years

In a separate FTC analysis of 2022 romance-scam loss reports that identified a contact method, 40% said first contact was on social media and 19% said it was on a website or app. The latter category is broader than dating apps alone. Reports without a contact method were excluded from these percentages. You cannot apply the 40% and 19% to every 2023 report, or use them to compare the safety of two dating platforms. The evidence table labels the earlier year for a reason.

The FTC published a newer contact finding in 2026: nearly 60% of people who reported losing money to a romance scam in 2025, after reports with missing or 'other' contact methods were excluded, said it started on social media. The agency also notes that it did not collect reports during the 2025 government shutdown. This is a 2025 contact-origin share, not a 2025 total for all romance-scam reports or losses. It should not be put next to the 2022 40% as a clean trend without accounting for the different reporting periods and records.

The place where contact starts can differ from where the conversation continues. The FTC described scammers moving people to other messaging services. If someone first sends a social-media message and later asks to talk elsewhere, the origin remains social media for that source analysis. These figures show that romance scams are not confined to dating products. A person should use the same care with an unexpected private message as with a dating-app conversation that turns into a money request.

What the figures cannot calculate

A scam rate needs a defined group of people exposed to a specific risk and a count of incidents in that group over a stated period. The FTC report total does not identify all dating-app users who were exposed, and the contact source is missing for some loss reports. It also cannot identify which app a person chose, how long they used it, or how many conversations they had. No honest division of the published numbers produces a chance of being scammed on Tinder, Hinge, Bumble, or a social network.

A year-to-year change in reported losses also needs care. Reporting behavior, data contributors, scam types, and individual large losses can affect a total. An increase would not automatically prove that every user's risk rose; a decrease would not make any money request safe. Treat the FTC figures as reports and losses that merit attention, then move to the actual behavior in a conversation. The decision to send money should never rest on a population percentage.

Recognize the money request

The FTC describes people who build a relationship online, avoid meeting, and then ask for money through an urgent story. The story may involve illness, a package, travel, or an investment. The exact script can change. The practical warning is the request to move your money to someone whose identity and claim you cannot verify independently. Gift cards, bank transfers, cryptocurrency, and payment apps each have different recovery paths; none makes a stranger's request safer.

If a new contact asks for money, pause the conversation and do not send it. Do not pay a fee to release a package, send gift-card codes, or follow an investment instruction from someone you have not met. A photo search and a conversation with a trusted person can help you examine a story, but neither makes a payment safe by itself. Someone can use a stolen photo, a convincing video, or a detailed personal story. Focus on the request and the independent evidence, not on how natural the conversation feels.

If you have already sent money

Contact the bank, card company, payment app, or other provider used for the transfer as soon as you can. Tell them you suspect fraud and ask whether the payment can be stopped or recovered. Time matters, but recovery is not guaranteed. Keep the messages, profile details, transaction records, and the dates while they are still available. Report the account to the service where contact occurred, and send a report through ReportFraud.ftc.gov. If someone is threatening to release intimate images, the FTC also points people to the FBI's reporting route.

There is no blame in making a report. The published totals exist because people told the agency what happened, and a report can help investigators see patterns. A family member or friend may be able to sit with you while you contact the payment provider and preserve records. Be cautious of anyone who later promises to recover the money for a fee; that is another request for money that should be checked independently. The immediate steps are practical even though the 2023 table cannot tell you the outcome of any one case.

Use the table without losing the human question

If you quote the article's headline number, say '64,003 reports received by the FTC in 2023,' not '64,003 people on dating apps were scammed.' If you quote the loss, say 'reported losses' and give the same year. If you use a contact share, name its 2022 or 2025 subset and the excluded-method limit. Those small wording choices prevent a report count from turning into a false prediction about everyone who dates online.

For a personal decision, set the population table aside when a person asks you for money. You do not need to calculate a risk score to refuse a transfer. You can stop, verify claims through a source the contact does not control, and speak with someone you trust. The FTC's figures explain why the pattern deserves attention; its consumer guidance gives the action. Both belong in the article, with their different limits intact.