Hybrid conferences remain a practical way to combine venue-based networking with remote access. The available evidence spans 2020–2026 surveys, a 2024 meetings forecast, and undated vendor case studies. Together, these figures show how format choices, travel, attendance recovery, and audience engagement differ by market and event design.
Contents
- How common hybrid and virtual formats are
- Attendance recovery and expectations
- Registration and travel participation
- How hybrid programs are structured
- Attendee preferences and behavior
- Attendance and engagement benchmarks
How common hybrid and virtual formats are
The 2024 Global Meetings and Events Forecast found that respondents expected 42% of meetings and events worldwide to be in-person only, 29% to be virtual-only, and 29% to be hybrid during 2024. These are expectations from the forecast survey, not a count of every event held.
Regional expectations varied. North American respondents expected 18% of their 2024 meetings and events to be hybrid, matching the 18% reported by European respondents. The expected share was 22% in Latin America and 29% in Asia-Pacific. The regional figures suggest that a global hybrid-event assumption can conceal meaningful differences in planning environments. (Source: 2024 Global Meetings and Events Forecast, 2024 forecast.)
More recent PCMA survey results describe continuing digital and hybrid activity among respondents. They had organized an average of 8 digital or hybrid events since January and expected to host an average of 12 over the following 12 months. The survey period was 2026, so these averages describe the participating respondents rather than all conference organizers.
PCMA respondents also reported different levels of digital integration. In the 2026 survey, 21% offered an asynchronous digital version of part of an in-person event, while 34% offered real-time streaming of part of an in-person event. Another 44% reported being fully in-person with no digital version. The categories describe reported offerings and should not be treated as mutually exclusive unless the survey defines them that way. (Source: Convene’s 32nd Meetings Market Survey Results, 2026 survey.)
Attendance recovery and expectations
The latest PCMA survey provides a direct comparison with a comparable pre-pandemic in-person event. Among respondents, 49% said attendance at their most recent in-person event increased, 34% said it decreased, and 16% said it stayed the same. These responses measure direction of change, not the average percentage increase or decrease in headcount.
Expectations for the next year were somewhat more positive. Forty-nine percent anticipated increased in-person attendance, 38% anticipated unchanged attendance, and 13% anticipated decreased attendance. The measurement is an expectation from the 2026 survey, not a later attendance result. (Source: Convene’s 32nd Meetings Market Survey Results, 2026 survey and next-year expectations.)
The 2024 forecast also reported progress toward 2019 attendance levels by region. In North America, 77% said attendee numbers had returned to 2019 levels or were expected to do so in 2024. In Europe, 30% said numbers had already returned to 2019 levels and a further 35% expected to reach them during 2024. In Latin America, 24% reported that numbers had returned to 2019 levels and 52% expected to reach them in 2024. In Asia-Pacific, the corresponding figures were 12% already returned and 43% expected during 2024.
These regional measures combine current status and forecast expectations in different ways, so they are best read as indicators of recovery timing rather than as a single global attendance rate. (Source: 2024 Global Meetings and Events Forecast, 2024 forecast.)
Registration and travel participation
An older PCMA Convene survey illustrates how uncertain hybrid registration could be during the May 17–20, 2021 survey period. For planned 2021 hybrid events, 4% expected registration to be more than 50% below the comparable 2019 or pre-pandemic 2020 event. Another 15% expected registration to be up to 50% below the baseline, while 10% expected registration to match it.
On the positive side, 4% expected registration to increase by up to 50% and 2% expected an increase of more than 50%. The largest single response was uncertainty: 37% could not estimate registration until closer to the event because of the fluid COVID environment. These figures are historical planning benchmarks, not current registration expectations. (Source: PCMA Convene COVID-19 Survey, May 17–20, 2021.)
Travel constraints were also visible in the July 7–15, 2020 APAC PCMA survey. Sixty percent of planners said they would travel only within their own country for a business event, while 10% said they would travel to another APAC country. Among suppliers, 48% said they would travel only within their own country. These results capture a specific COVID-era APAC survey and should not be generalized to present-day travel behavior. (Source: PCMA release results of first ever APAC research post COVID outbreak, July 7–15, 2020 survey.)
How hybrid programs are structured
Hybrid attendance is shaped by the relationship between the venue audience and the digital audience. In the May 2021 PCMA survey, 24% of planned hybrid events used simultaneous small in-person events plus streaming, a separate online program, and interaction between audiences. Twelve percent used simultaneous small in-person events plus streaming and a separate online program without cross-audience interaction.
Fourteen percent streamed a small in-person event without separate online content for digital participants. Eight percent used simultaneous regional in-person hubs with separate digital content. These categories show that “hybrid” can mean anything from a connected two-audience program to a stream of a small venue event. (Source: PCMA Convene COVID-19 Survey, May 17–20, 2021.)
PCMA’s March–August 2021 comparison also recorded a change in planned design. The share choosing simultaneous in-person and digital programming with cross-audience interaction fell from 28% to 19%. About 25% of planners used livestreaming without interaction between digital and in-person participants. Overall, the share planning simultaneous digital and in-person audiences fell from 65% to 48% across that six-month comparison. (Source: How Planners Are Customizing Hybrid Events, March–August 2021 comparison.)
The 2020 APAC PCMA survey captured another structural expectation: 27% believed small in-person events would need to go hybrid while large events remained wholly digital. Forty-one percent believed smaller and regional events would return before larger international events. Both figures are historical expectations from July 7–15, 2020, rather than evidence of what happened later. (Source: PCMA release results of first ever APAC research post COVID outbreak.)
Attendee preferences and behavior
Format preference depends on the audience sampled. Among Freeman in-person event attendees surveyed in January 2023, 80% would select in-person over a virtual alternative when offered the same event and other factors were held constant. One percent preferred remote participation under those conditions, while 19% said their choice depended on the specific event rather than format alone. (Source: Freeman Trends Report Summary Q1 2023, January 2023 survey.)
The same Freeman report found that 61% of NGEGs said crowds were not very or not at all important when deciding whether to attend an event. It also reported that 93% of NGEGs had attended an event during the prior 12 months. Average reported in-person attendance expectations rose from 3.4 events in September 2022 to 3.9 events in January 2023. These measures relate to Freeman’s defined audience, not all attendees.
Association data reported by PCMA showed a more evenly distributed preference during the transition period. In an In Personify survey, 58% of members attended a virtual association event in 2020, and 44% of those members said the virtual event led to meaningful connections. For safe-to-attend 2021 events, about 33% preferred in-person meetings, 33% preferred virtual meetings, and nearly 33% preferred hybrid meetings.
Association staff gave a different split for 2021: 33% preferred in-person meetings, 26% preferred hybrid meetings, and 37% preferred digital meetings. The staff and member figures come from different respondent groups and should not be combined into one preference estimate. (Source: What’s Next for Association Events?, 2020 survey and December 2020 preference survey.)
Attendance and engagement benchmarks
Vendor case studies provide concrete examples, but they are not representative industry averages and their case-study periods were not stated on the supplied source page. A Cvent AK Consulting case study recorded 3,500 virtual attendees and reported a 25% increase in attendance. It also recorded more than 550 hybrid attendees.
A Cvent MPI case study recorded 1,729 hybrid attendees, 51,000 engagement points, a 93% post-event approval rating, and $62,000 raised for charity. A Cvent InXpress case study recorded 1,500 virtual and onsite check-ins. These figures are useful as examples of possible event outcomes, but they do not establish a typical hybrid attendance or engagement rate. (Source: Cvent Hybrid Event Solutions, case studies with periods not stated.)
| Case study | Reported attendance or check-ins | Other reported measure |
|---|---|---|
| AK Consulting | 3,500 virtual attendees; more than 550 hybrid attendees | 25% increase in attendance |
| MPI | 1,729 hybrid attendees | 51,000 engagement points; 93% approval; $62,000 raised |
| InXpress | 1,500 virtual and onsite check-ins | Not stated |
Encore’s July 2021 Planner Pulse Survey offers another historical benchmark. More than 33% of event professionals had planned or executed a hybrid event, and about 66% expected to host an in-person event by the end of 2021. Ninety percent said they would or might use a digital-event strategy after in-person meetings recovered. Eleven percent required vaccination for attendance at in-person events, rather than merely recommending it. (Source: The Hybrid Event Format Is Here to Stay, Survey Suggests, July 2021 survey.)
For event planners, the most useful comparison is therefore not a single “normal” attendance number. The evidence points to distinct measures: format share, recovery direction, registration against a baseline, travel willingness, audience connection, check-ins, and engagement. Each should retain its source population, geography, measurement period, and whether it is a forecast, expectation, survey result, or case-study outcome.