Rising uncertainty reshapes reputational risk, but organisations hold firm on controls, says Willis

Rhea-AI Summary

Willis (NASDAQ: WTW) published the 2026 Reputational Risk Readiness Survey showing rising uncertainty about reputational exposure and stronger risk controls. Key findings: brand hotspot awareness fell to 37% (from 56% in 2024), low appetite for reputation risk rose to 56%, and modelling capabilities climbed to >30%.

Organisations report higher focus on stakeholder engagement, embedding reputation into enterprise risk management, and using actuarial-style models to quantify reputational losses.

Positive

• Modelling capability increased to >30% (from 11% in 2024)
• 82% place reputation among top three to five risks on registers
• Greater integration of reputation into enterprise risk management

Negative

• Awareness of brand negative-sentiment hotspots fell to 37% (from 56%)
• Low appetite for reputational risk rose to 56%
• 67% cite cyber-attacks as a top reputational concern

News Market Reaction – WTW

+0.53%

+0.53% Session close to close

In the Apr 28 session, WTW gained 0.53%, reflecting a mild positive market reaction.

Data tracked by StockTitan Argus on the day of publication.

Market Context

This announcement highlights growing corporate concern over reputational exposures, with only 37% of...

Analysis

This announcement highlights growing corporate concern over reputational exposures, with only 37% of respondents aware of key negative sentiment hotspots and 56% reporting low appetite for reputation risk. At the same time, more than 30% now claim strong capabilities to model financial impact, and 82% place reputation among their top risks. For WTW, this reinforces demand for advisory and insurance solutions around cyber, social harms, and enterprise risk management, complementing its recent product launches and partnerships in risk-focused areas.

Key Figures

Awareness of sentiment hotspots: 37% Awareness in 2024: 56% Low appetite for reputation risk: 56% +5 more

8 metrics

Awareness of sentiment hotspots 37% Share of respondents aware of key negative sentiment hotspots in 2026 survey

Awareness in 2024 56% Respondents aware of key negative sentiment hotspots in 2024 survey

Low appetite for reputation risk 56% Respondents reporting low appetite for reputation risk in latest survey

Low appetite in prior survey 36% Respondents reporting low appetite for reputation risk in previous survey

Cyber-attack concern 67% Respondents ranking cyber-attacks among greatest reputational concerns

Social harms concern 57% Respondents citing social harms like labour exploitation as top risk

Reputation in top risks 82% Organisations placing reputation in top three or five risks on registers

Strong modelling capabilities Over 30% Organisations reporting strong capabilities to model financial impact of reputational damage

Historical Context

5 past events · Latest: Apr 24 (Positive)

Pattern 5 events

Date	Event	Sentiment	24h Move	Catalyst
Apr 24	Sports partnership	Positive	-1.1%	Three-year global partnership as exclusive insurance partner of INEOS Grenadiers.
Apr 16	Market review	Neutral	+1.3%	Energy Market Review highlighting soft pricing despite losses and volatility.
Apr 13	Earnings date set	Neutral	+2.8%	Announcement of Q1 2026 earnings release and conference call schedule.
Apr 09	Product launch	Positive	-1.0%	Launch of Digital Infrastructure Protector for comprehensive data center risk cover.
Apr 01	Acquisition close	Positive	-1.1%	Completion of FlowStone Partners acquisition to expand private market solutions.

24h Move is the share-price change in the day after each event; other market factors may also have contributed.

Pattern Detected

Across recent headlines, several positive strategic updates (product launch, acquisition, partnership) were followed by negative one-day price reactions, while more informational or scheduling news saw positive reactions, indicating a tendency toward mixed or contrarian trading around upbeat announcements.

Recent Company History

Over the past month, WTW has announced a range of initiatives, including the FlowStone Partners acquisition on Apr 1, a new Digital Infrastructure Protector solution on Apr 9, and an upcoming Q1 2026 earnings release set for Apr 30. A global partnership with INEOS Grenadiers was unveiled on Apr 24. Price reactions over the next day have varied, with several strategic or growth-oriented updates met by modest declines, while informational releases saw gains. Today’s reputational risk survey fits within this stream of thematic thought-leadership and risk-focused communication.

Key Terms

esg, enterprise risk management, cyber-attacks, ai-enabled cybercrime, +4 more

8 terms

esg financial

"driven by global instability and increasing politicisation of issues such as ESG."

ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance, which are key factors investors consider when evaluating how sustainable and responsible a company is. It involves assessing how a company manages its impact on the environment, treats its employees and communities, and operates transparently and ethically. Investors use ESG criteria to identify businesses that align with their values and have the potential for long-term success.

enterprise risk management financial

"embedding reputation more firmly into enterprise risk management, and showing greater interest"

Enterprise Risk Management is a process companies use to identify, assess, and prepare for potential problems that could disrupt their success, like financial losses or reputation damage. It’s like a safety plan that helps a business stay strong and adapt quickly when unexpected challenges come up. This helps the company protect its future and keep running smoothly.

cyber-attacks technical

"67% ranked cyber-attacks among their greatest reputational concerns, as the reputational damage"

Cyber-attacks are deliberate attempts by outsiders or insiders to break into, disrupt, steal from, or damage a company’s digital systems and data—think of a digital break-in or vandalism. Investors care because successful attacks can cause direct financial losses, halt operations, harm reputation, trigger regulatory fines, and raise future security costs, all of which can lower a company’s revenue, increase risk, and affect stock value.

ai-enabled cybercrime technical

"their greatest reputational concerns, as the reputational damage from AI-enabled cybercrime"

AI-enabled cybercrime is the use of artificial intelligence tools to plan, automate, and scale digital attacks such as fraud, data theft, or network disruption; think of it as automated, smarter thieves that can work faster and impersonate people more convincingly. For investors it matters because these attacks can multiply financial losses, interrupt operations, trigger fines or lawsuits, damage reputation, and force higher spending on security and insurance—factors that can hurt revenue, margins and a company’s stock value.

actuarial methods financial

"developing more advanced tools, using actuarial methods to estimate how often reputation risks"

Actuarial methods are systematic mathematical and statistical techniques used to estimate future costs, risks and obligations, especially for insurance policies, pensions and long-term contracts. They matter to investors because these estimates determine how much a company must set aside and influence reported profits and financial health — like a weather forecast guiding how many umbrellas a shop should stock, different assumptions change perceived risk and value.

reputational risk financial

"New research from Willis, a WTW business, ... points to growing uncertainty around reputational risk"

Reputational risk is the danger that negative public perception—from scandals, poor products, harmful actions, or bad publicity—will damage a company’s trust and standing with customers, partners, regulators and investors. Like a stain on a brand that scares away buyers or lenders, it can reduce sales, increase costs, invite regulatory scrutiny, and cause a company’s stock price or ability to raise capital to fall, making it a key concern for investors.

risk-based approach financial

"A risk-based approach supports better decision-making about how to manage reputation"

A risk-based approach means prioritizing attention, resources and controls toward areas judged most likely to cause harm or loss, rather than treating all parts equally. Think of it like fixing the biggest leaks in a roof first: companies and regulators focus on the highest-impact risks to reduce potential losses, lower compliance costs, and protect value. For investors, it signals how management identifies vulnerabilities and allocates capital to preserve earnings and growth.

risk intelligence technical

"through sentiment tracking and risk intelligence, while developing their crisis preparedness"

Risk intelligence is the practical ability to spot, judge and respond to threats and opportunities that could affect an investment or business—like a driver who notices a slippery road, judges how dangerous it is and adjusts speed and route. For investors it matters because it guides decisions about which investments to hold, how much money to risk and how to prepare for setbacks, helping protect capital and improve chances of steady returns.

AI-generated analysis. How Rhea-AI works. Not financial advice.

See more from StockTitan in Google Search and AI answers. Adds StockTitan as a preferred source · opens Google

Add on Google Not now

LONDON, April 28, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- New research from Willis, a WTW business, (NASDAQ: WTW), points to growing uncertainty around reputational risk among corporate decision-makers, driven by global instability and increasing politicisation of issues such as ESG.

Findings from the 2026 Reputational Risk Readiness Survey Report indicate that organisations are less confident about how customers and other stakeholders perceive them and are increasingly unclear about their most significant reputational vulnerabilities. At the same time, appetite for taking on additional reputational risk has fallen sharply, even where potential rewards are high.

However, this uncertainty may have been a spur to action as efforts to strengthen risk controls have gathered momentum since the last survey. Organisations are increasing engagement with stakeholders, embedding reputation more firmly into enterprise risk management, and showing greater interest in modelling the financial impact of negative reputational events.

Key findings include:

• Only 37% of respondents were aware of the key hotspots of negative sentiment around their brand, compared to 56% in 2024, revealing a worrying gap in current knowledge.
• 56% said they had a low appetite for reputation risk, compared to 36% in the previous survey, indicating a loss of interest in risky activities and associations.
• 67% ranked cyber-attacks among their greatest reputational concerns, as the reputational damage from AI-enabled cybercrime continues to grow.
• 57% named social harms such as labour exploitation in the supply chain as a top reputation risk, which may reflect weaker oversight of labour standards as companies relocate their supply lines.
• 82% put reputation among the top three or top five risks on their risk registers, indicating that organisations take threats to their brand and reputation seriously.
• Over 30% of organisations said they have strong capabilities to model the financial impact of reputational damage (up from 11% in 2024) suggesting that companies increasingly treat reputation as a measurable financial risk. In response, the insurance industry is developing more advanced tools, using actuarial methods to estimate how often reputation risks occur and how severe their impact could be, similar to models used for natural disasters.

David Bennett, Head of Reputational Risk Management from the Willis Direct & Facultative team, said: “In uncertain and turbulent times, organisations who take a surface approach to reputation as a function of communication and PR may be found wanting. Those that integrate it into their business processes and invest in building trust with stakeholders and customers every day, are better placed to build the bases they need to avoid credibility hiccups when a crisis hits.

A good starting point is developing a deeper understanding of the specific reputation risks that affect a business. Identifying and monitoring these key vulnerabilities can help organisations direct efforts and resources to neutralise threats and turn perceptions around. A risk-based approach supports better decision-making about how to manage reputation and prepare for the financial and operational impacts of an adverse publicity event.”

“With the right tools and partners, modelling the frequency and severity of likely sources of reputational threats is possible. The majority of reputational crises emerge from issues that are already known and can be anticipated and managed. Organisations should focus on building their understanding of these underlying risks through sentiment tracking and risk intelligence, while developing their crisis preparedness and tightening broad level accountability.”

About the survey

• Participants: 500 global senior executives responsible for risk strategy across their organisation, including CEOs, directors of finance, risk, marketing, HR, and communications
• Sectors: 100 companies each in retail, manufacturing, leisure and hospitality, transportation, and non- government organisations (NGOs) and charities
• Location: 20 countries in Europe and Middle East, Asia Pacific, North and South America and Africa
• Turnover: 37% $1bn-$2.5bn; 26% $2.5bn-$5bn; 36% over $5 billion

The report can be downloaded here.

About WTW

At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance.

Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you.

Media contacts

Jo Barrett
jo.barrett@wtwco.com / +44 7940703911

Lauren David:
Lauren.david@wtwco.com / +44 7385947619

FAQ

What did Willis report about awareness of brand risk hotspots in April 2026 (WTW)?

Awareness of key negative-sentiment hotspots dropped to 37%, down from 56% in 2024. According to Willis, this gap signals weaker visibility into where brands face the most reputational pressure and a potential blind spot for prevention efforts.

How did appetite for reputational risk change in Willis's 2026 survey (WTW)?

Respondents reporting a low appetite for reputational risk rose to 56%, versus 36% previously. According to Willis, organisations are less willing to accept reputational exposure, even when potential rewards exist, prompting more defensive risk strategies.

What reputational threats did Willis identify as most serious in the 2026 survey (WTW)?

Cyber-attacks were named by 67% and social harms by 57% as top reputational concerns. According to Willis, AI-enabled cybercrime and supply-chain social issues are driving those elevated risk rankings.

How many organisations can model financial impact of reputational damage, per Willis (WTW)?

Over 30% of organisations report strong capabilities to model financial impacts, up from 11% in 2024. According to Willis, this shows a shift toward treating reputation as a quantifiable financial risk using actuarial-style methods.

What risk-management actions are organisations taking after Willis's 2026 findings (WTW)?

Organisations are increasing stakeholder engagement, embedding reputation into ERM, and improving sentiment tracking. According to Willis, these steps aim to identify vulnerabilities earlier and strengthen crisis preparedness and accountability.