Hybrid events continue to connect in-person participation with virtual access. Recent figures show broad adoption, while older benchmark data helps explain how audiences engage, why organizers use the format, and where measurement remains difficult.
Contents
- Hybrid event adoption
- Forecasts and format preferences
- Audience reach and participation
- Engagement in virtual sessions
- Technology, data, and ROI
- Audience experience, accessibility, and sustainability
Hybrid event adoption
The strongest recent indicators point to hybrid and virtual formats becoming a normal part of event planning rather than a temporary response to disruption. In the Amex GBT 2026 research, 68% of event professionals said they include hybrid and virtual meetings in their events programs. Statista reports that six out of ten associations expect hybrid and virtual events to remain a major part of their events.
The ICE Benchmarking Report 2024 found that 74.5% of event professionals said hybrid events are here to stay. In the same report, 52% said hybrid events are valued for their flexibility and potential to reduce travel. These figures describe two related reasons for adoption: operational adaptability and the ability to give participants another way to attend.
The Skift Meetings 2023 figures provide another view of the format’s place in the market. They report that 70% of events were hybrid or offered an option to attend virtually. The same source found that 58% of meeting professionals said event sustainability had become more important in their role since before Covid, a change that supported movement toward hybrid formats.
Hybrid participation also appears in forward-looking planning. The Cvent Planner Sourcing Report 2026 found that 28% of planners considered the continued frequency of hybrid and virtual meetings one of the top trends affecting 2026 event programs. A Cvent event statistics summary put the broader trend figure at 83%: that share of event professionals said hybrid and virtual formats were among the top event trends shaping 2026.
Forecasts and format preferences
Forecast data suggests that hybrid events will remain present even as in-person programming continues. Amex GBT 2025 estimated that 15% of events in North America would take place in a hybrid format in 2025. This is an estimate for a specific geography and year, not a global measurement of all event activity.
The same Amex GBT 2025 research found that 20% of meeting professionals preferred hybrid events to other formats. Preference is narrower than adoption: an organization may include hybrid meetings in its program even when planners or audiences favor an in-person or virtual alternative for a particular event.
The 2026 Amex GBT forecast was based on 601 meeting professionals in eight countries. Its wider planning context was positive: 85% of meeting professionals were optimistic or very optimistic about 2026. Half of industry professionals said artificial intelligence was integrated throughout event planning and execution, while 31% said improving data collection was a top priority for 2026.
| Indicator | Figure | Source and period |
|---|---|---|
| Professionals including hybrid and virtual meetings in programs | 68% | Amex GBT 2026 |
| Associations expecting hybrid and virtual events to remain major | 6 in 10 | Statista |
| North American events expected to be hybrid | 15% | Amex GBT 2025 estimate |
| Meeting professionals preferring hybrid | 20% | Amex GBT 2025 |
| Professionals saying hybrid events are here to stay | 74.5% | ICE Benchmarking Report 2024 |
| Professionals naming hybrid or virtual formats a top 2026 trend | 83% | Cvent event statistics summary |
These measures are not interchangeable. Some describe event professionals, some describe associations, and one describes expected event share in North America. Together, however, they show a format with continuing institutional support and a measurable role in future planning.
Audience reach and participation
Reaching a wider audience is one of the clearest stated purposes of virtual participation. In Skift Meetings 2022, 38% of planners said the primary use of virtual events was to reach a wider audience. The same source found that 21% of planners saw virtual event technology as a necessary platform for their strategy.
Virtual technology was not always treated as the main format. In the same Skift Meetings 2022 research, 17% of respondents said virtual event technology was part of a backup plan if in-person events had to pivot. This distinction matters: for some teams, virtual capability was strategic infrastructure; for others, it was contingency capacity.
The Bizzabo case study of Agora’s RTE2022 hybrid event records 2,650 virtual and in-person attendees. Of those, 2,500 were virtual and 150 were in person. Virtual attendees therefore made up the large majority of the participation reported in that case study, while the event retained a physical audience as well.
Agora’s overall Net Promoter Score for the hybrid event was 6.5, according to the Bizzabo case study. That score is specific to the case study and should not be generalized to all hybrid events. It does show that hybrid-event evaluation can include an overall recommendation measure alongside attendance counts.
Event scale varies considerably across organizers. The ICE Benchmarking Report 2025 found that 52% of meeting professionals manage events with 1 to 500 attendees, 20% manage events with 500 to 1,000 attendees, and 15% manage events with more than 2,500 attendees. These audience bands help put hybrid delivery decisions in context: the needs of a small recurring event differ from those of a large program with thousands of participants.
The BizBash and Cvent figures show that small events are often recurring rather than occasional. Forty percent of event professionals host small events monthly, 30% host them quarterly, and 15% host them weekly. A hybrid option can therefore affect a repeated series of meetings, not only a single large conference.
Engagement in virtual sessions
The Bizzabo Virtual Events Benchmark Report Q2 2021 measured several aspects of virtual-session behavior. Fifty-two percent of virtual sessions focused on interaction. Forty-two percent of all attendees watched the entirety of a virtual session, and attendees were engaged for 68% of the session on average. The average virtual session length was 54 minutes.
These measures describe different parts of participation. Session focus concerns the programming format. Completion concerns whether attendees watched from beginning to end. Average engagement concerns time spent engaged during the session. None of the three should be treated as the same metric, and the report period was Q2 2021.
The 2026 Amex GBT research points toward continued demand for active programming. Forty-two percent of attendees wanted more interactivity in programming such as workshops. Forty percent wanted more opportunities to socialize with other attendees, and 37% wanted more personalized experiences. The figures indicate audience preferences, not guaranteed outcomes for every hybrid design.
The contrast between the older session benchmark and newer preference data is useful for planners. A 54-minute average virtual session and 68% average engagement provide historical reference points, while the 2026 figures emphasize what attendees want more of: interaction, social connection, and personalization.
Technology, data, and ROI
Hybrid delivery creates more data sources, but the ICE Benchmarking Report 2025 shows that many teams still rely on manual systems. Seventy-five percent of teams use spreadsheets and manual tracking systems for event data and engagement metrics. Sixty-six percent use CRM systems and dedicated event platforms, and 79% use multiple platforms for event data.
Integration remains uneven. Twenty-four percent of event teams have fully integrated event technology with marketing or sales systems, 43% have partial integration, and 33% are not integrated at all, according to the ICE Benchmarking Report 2025. These figures total the reported integration categories and show why attendance, engagement, and business outcomes may not be visible in one place.
Among event professionals who track ROI, 90% use registration and attendance as metrics. Seventy-six percent use post-event surveys, 65% measure content engagement, 31% use revenue attribution, and 19% use cost per acquisition. The ICE Benchmarking Report 2025 reports these measures as separate uses; they are not a single standardized ROI formula.
Amex GBT’s 2026 research found that 36% of meeting professionals use data and ROI measurement tools to track and prove event success. The same research found that 31% considered improving data collection a top priority for 2026. Together, these figures suggest that proving value is an active planning concern, while collection and integration remain unfinished work for many teams.
Staffing is another operating constraint. In the ICE Benchmarking Report 2025, 71% of event professionals expected team sizes to remain stable over the next 12 months and 21% expected event team growth. Separately, Amex GBT 2026 found that 73% of planners said they would not be adding to their events team in 2026. Stable staffing alongside broader format demands makes repeatable workflows and connected measurement especially relevant.
Audience experience, accessibility, and sustainability
Hybrid programs are often justified through flexibility, but audience experience remains central. In the Amex GBT 2026 research, 74% of planners said they wanted to improve the attendee experience with more memorable events. Attendee preferences included more interactivity, more social opportunities, and more personalized experiences.
Accessibility is also receiving greater attention. The Cvent Planner Sourcing Report 2026 found that 74% of planners were prioritizing accessibility more than in prior years. Forty percent of planners looked for accessible parking among venue accessibility features. The parking figure covers one venue feature; it does not measure every accessibility requirement or the accessibility of a complete hybrid experience.
The sustainability connection is reflected in the Skift Meetings 2023 statistic that 58% of meeting professionals said sustainability had become more important in their role since pre-Covid. Hybrid attendance may reduce some travel needs, but the supplied figures do not quantify travel reductions, emissions avoided, or the comparative environmental impact of different event formats.
For readers assessing hybrid event performance, the most defensible approach is to keep the dimensions separate: report the audience mix, distinguish virtual completion from engagement, document accessibility features, and identify which ROI measures were used. The available benchmarks show strong adoption and a continuing role for hybrid access, while also showing that measurement systems, integration, and staffing capacity remain important parts of the story.