More sales from the traffic you already have
Merchants keep treating checkout abandonment as a trust problem when the more measurable cause is field count and flow length, and the difference matters because you fix those two things differently.
Most merchants treat checkout abandonment as a trust problem and reach for badges, guarantees, and reassurance copy near the buy button. The measured cause, at least the part Baymard has been able to isolate, is simpler and duller: checkouts ask for too many fields and structure them in ways that slow a thumb down. Trust signals do not fix a checkout that requires 11.3 form fields when the visitor expected four.
Baymard’s collected average across studies is 70.22%, and that number gets quoted constantly as if it were a single fixed fact. It is actually an average built from separate studies with their own dates and their own retrieval methods. A 2025 Uptain figure puts it at 71.72%. A 2023 SalesCycle figure puts it at 79.53%. A 2022 Fresh Relevance figure puts it at 79.30%, and another Fresh Relevance figure, retrieved a different time, shows 68.70%. None of these studies measured the same population of stores at the same moment, so treating any single figure as your target is a mistake. The range itself, roughly from the high 60s to the high 70s as a percentage, is the more honest thing to hold onto.
| Study | Retrieved | Abandonment rate |
|---|---|---|
| Uptain 2025 | August 7, 2025 | 71.72% |
| SalesCycle 2023 | July 11, 2023 | 79.53% |
| Fresh Relevance 2022 | August 16, 2022 | 68.70% |
| Fresh Relevance 2022 (second figure) | August 16, 2022 | 79.30% |
| Baymard collected average | ongoing | 70.22% |
Baymard’s checkout form field research puts the average checkout at 11.3 form fields, and separately finds that 17% of users have abandoned a purchase because the checkout felt too complex. Those two numbers sit next to each other in the same research and the connection is not subtle. Every field is a decision point on a small screen, and a checkout with more fields than the visitor expected is a checkout that gets closed. Cutting from 11.3 fields down to something closer to what the order actually requires, shipping address, payment, contact, is a concrete task, not a design philosophy.
One of Baymard’s specific findings is that 89% of checkouts do not use a single combined name field, splitting it into first and last instead, even though their usability testing shows users generally expect and move through a single field faster. This one detail is worth checking on your own checkout page today because it is binary: either your checkout has a single name field or it does not, and if 89% of checkouts studied get this wrong, the odds are yours does too. It is the kind of fix that takes an afternoon rather than a quarter.
Baymard frames the whole exercise in financial terms: $260 billion in lost orders is recoverable through checkout usability fixes alone, tied to a 35.26% increase in conversion rate if those usability issues were resolved. This is not a figure about trust, shipping costs, or pricing, it is specifically about the mechanics of the checkout flow itself, meaning field count, structure, and the kind of friction a visitor hits with their thumb rather than their wallet. The size of that number is the reason checkout usability keeps showing up as a priority above other conversion work, because it is one of the few areas where the fix is a form field, not a marketing budget.
The figures above were read from Baymard Institute’s cart abandonment rate statistics page and its checkout form field research page, both as loaded on September 8, 2026. Start by counting the fields on your own checkout, compare that count against the 11.3 average, and check whether your name field is split into two boxes when the research says one performs better.
Baymard's collected average across studies is 70.22%. Individual studies vary, from 68.70% in one Fresh Relevance measurement up to 79.53% in a SalesCycle report, and 71.72% in a 2025 Uptain measurement. There is no single correct number, so treat your own store's rate as worth comparing against a range rather than one target. A rate near the low end of that range, closer to 68.70%, suggests a checkout flow that is already doing better than most.
The measured average across checkouts studied by Baymard is 11.3 form fields. That count matters because 17% of users say they have abandoned a purchase due to checkout complexity, and field count is one of the clearest drivers of that complaint. Cutting fields is not about looking minimal, it is about removing the specific friction that a fraction of your visitors have already told researchers they react to.
Baymard's research found that 89% of checkouts do not use a single combined name field, splitting first and last name instead. Their usability testing observed that users generally expect and move faster through a single name field, which is why they list it as a specific recommendation. This is a small, checkable thing on your own checkout page, not a redesign.
Baymard's figure is $260 billion, calculated from checkout usability issues alone, separate from other causes of abandonment like shipping cost surprises or account requirements. That number is tied to a 35.26% increase in conversion rate if usability issues were fixed across the board. It is a market-wide estimate, not a per-store guarantee, but it tells you checkout friction is not a marginal issue.
It comes from Baymard Institute's ongoing collection of cart abandonment studies, which they average into a single figure, currently 70.22%. That average is built from multiple independent studies conducted by different research firms, listed with their own retrieval dates, ranging from a 2022 Fresh Relevance figure of 79.30% to a 2025 Uptain figure of 71.72%. It moves as new studies get added, so check the retrieval date on whatever figure you cite.