The long-held consensus that ransomware is the undisputed king of cyber threats is being fundamentally challenged, as a new report indicates that corporate leaders now fear the pervasive and insidious nature of cyber-enabled fraud even more. This marks a pivotal moment in cybersecurity, reflecting a landscape where deception and financial manipulation have become as disruptive as data encryption. For the first time, the boardroom’s primary concern has shifted from the loud, destructive force of ransomware to the quieter, more personal impact of sophisticated fraud, a change driven by direct experience, with nearly three-quarters of executives having been personally affected or knowing someone who has.
Understanding the Shifting Cyber Threat Landscape
An extensive report from the World Economic Forum (WEF) provides the foundational evidence for this evolving perception of risk. It details a significant recalibration in how global business leaders view the dangers populating the digital world. Historically, the immediate and visible disruption caused by ransomware attacks placed it at the top of corporate risk registers. However, the data now shows that the relentless and often less-publicized threat of cyber-enabled fraud has overtaken it as the chief concern among executives.
This transition underscores the changing tactics of malicious actors and the broadening impact of their campaigns. While ransomware locks down systems and halts operations, cyber fraud erodes trust, drains financial resources through deception, and can cause significant reputational damage without the fanfare of a system-wide shutdown. The WEF’s findings signal that organizations are increasingly grappling with the financial and psychological toll of attacks that manipulate human behavior and exploit financial processes.
A Comparative Analysis of Executive Concerns
Diverging Risk Perceptions in the C Suite
A closer look reveals a fascinating divergence of opinion within the executive ranks, particularly between Chief Executive Officers (CEOs) and their Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs). For CEOs, the outlook for 2026 places cyber-enabled fraud as the foremost risk, followed by the emerging threats of AI-related vulnerabilities and traditional software flaws. This is a marked departure from their 2025 priorities, which were dominated by ransomware, fraud, and supply-chain disruptions. The CEO’s focus has clearly pivoted from operational disruption toward more nuanced financial and technological risks.
In stark contrast, CISOs maintain a more traditional view of the threat landscape. Their primary concern remains ransomware, a threat they are directly responsible for mitigating. Following ransomware, CISOs rank supply-chain issues and software vulnerabilities as their top worries. This difference in perspective highlights a potential disconnect in strategic alignment; while the CEO is concerned with the financial health and future-proofing of the business against new technologies, the CISO remains focused on defending against the most technically disruptive attacks on the network.
The Influence of Organizational Cyber Resilience
The level of an organization’s cyber maturity directly correlates with what its leadership fears most. This comparison reveals two distinct mindsets shaped by defensive capability. CEOs at highly resilient organizations, those with robust and mature security programs, tend to be more forward-looking. Their top concern is the threat posed by AI, followed by cyber fraud and supply-chain risks. Having established strong defenses against foundational threats like ransomware, they have the strategic space to concentrate on what lies ahead.
Conversely, CEOs at organizations with low cyber-resilience are preoccupied with more immediate and foundational dangers. Their list of top concerns is led by cyber fraud, followed closely by ransomware and software vulnerabilities. This focus indicates they are still grappling with securing the basics and defending against the most common and currently damaging attacks. Their reality is one of daily fire-fighting, which leaves little room for contemplating the next generation of cyber threats.
The Geopolitical Context Shaping Defense Strategies
Geopolitical volatility has become an undeniable factor influencing cybersecurity strategies for both fraud and ransomware. A majority of CEOs—two-thirds, in fact—now see global instability as a “defining feature of cybersecurity,” compelling a strategic pivot toward greater threat awareness. This shared context shapes defenses against both attack vectors, as nation-state actors are known to employ both disruptive ransomware and sophisticated fraud campaigns to achieve their objectives.
In response to this heightened risk, more than a third of companies are actively increasing their investment in nation-state threat intelligence and strengthening their collaboration with government agencies. The primary drivers for this strategic shift are the rising threat of attacks on critical infrastructure, the spread of disinformation, and the increasing convergence of Information Technology (IT) and Operational Technology (OT) systems. Despite these efforts, confidence is waning; only 37% of CEOs feel their country can effectively handle a major cyber incident, a drop from 42% in 2025.
Broader Challenges and Organizational Blind Spots
Beyond the direct comparison of fraud and ransomware, organizations face systemic challenges that undermine their defenses against both. The rapid integration of artificial intelligence is a primary example, creating new vulnerabilities that can be exploited for either type of attack. Executives express growing concern over AI-related data leaks (30%) and the use of AI by hackers to enhance their attacks (28%). A significant blind spot appears to be the security of the AI code supply chain itself, a risk that only 6% of respondents cited as a major concern.
Furthermore, a critical deficiency exists in the security of Operational Technology (OT), the systems that manage industrial processes. This neglect creates a vast and often unmonitored attack surface. The data reveals a concerning lack of oversight, with only 32% of organizations actively monitoring their OT assets for threats. Even more telling is the lack of executive visibility, as a mere 16% of companies provide board-level reports on OT security. This gap leaves critical infrastructure vulnerable to both ransomware attacks designed to halt physical operations and fraud schemes that could manipulate industrial controls for financial gain.
Conclusion Tailoring Strategy to Threat and Maturity
The evidence makes it clear that cyber fraud has surpassed ransomware as the principal cyber concern for the broader executive population, signaling a definitive shift in the threat landscape. This change demands a more nuanced approach to cybersecurity strategy, one that acknowledges the differing priorities within the C-suite and the critical role of organizational maturity. A one-size-fits-all defense is no longer viable in a world of diverging threats.
An organization’s strategy must be tailored to its specific level of cyber-resilience. Organizations with lower maturity must prioritize strengthening their foundational defenses against both the immediate financial drain of cyber fraud and the operational paralysis of ransomware. In contrast, highly resilient organizations should leverage their strong defensive posture to pivot toward addressing emerging and future threats, such as the sophisticated vulnerabilities introduced by artificial intelligence. Ultimately, understanding where an organization stands on the maturity spectrum is the first step toward building a defense that is truly fit for purpose.
