Geopolitical risks affect one in two Swiss companies – but there are gaps in their preparedness

Read in German, read in French

• Geopolitical risks are taking their toll on Swiss companies: more than half (53%) report negative impacts on turnover and sales. 
• 42% of companies state that at least 40% of the political risk events affecting them over the past twelve months were unexpected.
• Many companies are inadequately prepared for geopolitical risks. Whilst 59% carry out scenario analyses, only just under a third (30%) do so regularly and proactively.
• A lack of defined responsibilities is holding back the development of geostrategic expertise: only 22% of companies have defined clear responsibilities.
• Just under three-quarters (73%) of companies monitor political risks, but only 48% do so regularly and proactively.
• 50% of companies have adapted their AI governance, whilst 43% have strengthened controls on cross-border data, technologies or intellectual property.

Zurich, 31 August 2026 – Geopolitical tensions, trade conflicts, sanctions and regulatory changes have long since ceased to be merely abstract risks for Swiss companies. They are having an increasingly direct impact on business operations, growth and strategic decisions. At the same time, there is a gap between the monitoring of political risks and companies’ ability to systematically prepare for their occurrence. This is revealed by a recent survey conducted by the audit and consultancy EY in Switzerland. For the 2026 EY Geostrategy in Practice Survey of Swiss Companies, a total of 244 executives and decision-makers from companies of various sizes and from different sectors operating in Switzerland were surveyed in July and August 2026. The survey examined how companies identify, assess and manage political risks, and what impact these have on their business operations.

Famke Krumbmüller, Partner and EY Geostrategy Europe Leader, comments on the findings: “Geopolitical risks have become a tangible business factor for Swiss companies. The vast majority are monitoring developments and attempting to assess their consequences. However, the results also show that there is still a significant gap between recognising a risk and systematically preparing for its occurrence – a trend we are also observing in other countries. Particularly in an increasingly volatile environment, it is no longer enough simply to monitor developments. Companies must be able to run through different scenarios, clearly identify the implications, and derive concrete courses of action from them at an early stage.”

Political risks are widely monitored, but not yet systematically managed

The vast majority of the companies surveyed are involved in identifying and monitoring political risks. 73% monitor and assess political risks and their likelihood of occurrence at least on an ad hoc basis, whilst 48% do so regularly and proactively. Furthermore, 72% obtain insights into political risks from internal and external sources. Two-thirds (66%) collect both qualitative and quantitative data on political risks. The fundamental impact on business is also analysed extensively, but usually only after it has already occurred: 81% of companies assess the overall impact of identified political risks at least on an ad hoc basis. On closer inspection, however, this proportion decreases. Of the 59% that quantify the expected impact on individual business areas, only 32% do so regularly and proactively.

The gap is even more evident when it comes to concrete risk management: whilst just under six in ten companies (59%) carry out scenario analyses, only around three in ten (30%) do so systematically and proactively. The remaining 29% carry out scenario analyses only on an ad hoc and reactive basis. Stress tests (25%), trigger-based contingency measures (18%) and tabletop simulations (16%) are used even less frequently on a regular and proactive basis.

There is also room for improvement when it comes to embedding geostrategy within organisations. Only 22% of the companies surveyed have systematically and proactively assigned responsibility for geostrategic issues to a specific individual, role or cross-functional team. Half (50%) do not identify the relevant roles and do not recruit individuals with the appropriate geostrategic background knowledge.

Many political risk events take companies by surprise

A look at the experiences of the past twelve months also illustrates just how difficult it is to predict geopolitical developments. 42% of the companies surveyed state that at least 40% of the political risk events that affected them were unexpected. Famke Krumbmüller says: “The high number of unexpected events underlines how difficult it has become to map geopolitical developments using traditional risk management approaches. Companies therefore need not only better information, but also structures that enable rapid decision-making and implementation. The key is not to predict every political event correctly. The key is to be prepared for different developments and to be able to react quickly when necessary.”

Turnover, supply chains and growth particularly affected

The impact of political risks is already clearly evident in key business areas. More than half of the companies surveyed (53%) report negative impacts on turnover and sales over the past 24 months. For operational processes and supply chains, the figure is just under half (49%). Growth and investment are also affected: 41% of companies report negative impacts on growth, investment or transactions. For finance and taxation, the figure stands at 28%; for reputation and compliance, 24%; and for technology, data and intellectual property, 23%. Positive impacts are cited significantly less frequently. For turnover and sales, 14% report positive effects, whilst for growth, investment and transactions, the figure is 8%.

Geopolitics is reshaping strategy and investment decisions

Companies are responding to the changed environment with specific adjustments. Almost half (48%) have made at least moderate changes to their risk management over the past 24 months. 45% have made at least moderate adjustments to their strategy, and a further 45% to growth, investment and transactions. Around four in ten companies have also adapted their approach to technology, AI, data and intellectual property (44%), compliance (42%) and their operational processes and supply chains (41%).

These changes thus extend beyond traditional risk management and are increasingly influencing strategic business decisions. Among the 110 respondents who have made at least moderate adjustments to growth, investment or transactions, a more cautious investment approach is evident: 41% have reduced the breadth or number of their investment markets, whilst 16% have increased them. 37% report a decline in confidence when entering new markets, compared with 22% whose confidence has increased. At the same time, 35% of these companies have raised their minimum returns or risk premiums, whilst only 11% have lowered them. Furthermore, for 35%, the timeframes for approving transactions have lengthened.

Geopolitics is also changing the approach to AI and technology

The impact of geopolitical risks is also particularly evident in the fields of technology, AI and data. Of the 108 respondents who have made at least moderate adjustments in this area, half (50%) report that their company has amended the rules governing AI governance, the deployment or use of AI, depending on the market or region. 43% of these companies have tightened controls on cross-border data, technologies or intellectual property. 30% are increasingly relying on sovereign, local or country-specific AI and cloud solutions; 29% have reduced their dependence on certain foreign technology providers, platforms or ecosystems; and 27% have regionalised or localised their data, AI or technology infrastructure across different jurisdictions.

Krumbmüller concludes by emphasising: “Geopolitics is increasingly changing not only the perception of risk, but also the way in which companies invest, deploy technology and shape their strategy. For internationally networked Swiss companies in particular, the ability to translate geopolitical developments into business decisions is becoming a key strategic competence. Companies that establish clear lines of responsibility, systematically analyse scenarios and prepare concrete courses of action cannot eliminate uncertainty – but they can significantly increase their resilience.”

About the survey

The survey involved 244 executives and decision-makers from companies in Switzerland. The respondents represent companies of various sizes: 27% work in SMEs (10 to 249 employees), 25% in large companies (1,000 to 9,999 employees) and 22% in corporate groups (more than 10,000 employees). A further 17% work in small enterprises (fewer than 10 employees), and 9% in medium-sized enterprises (250 to 999 employees).

The respondents cover a broad spectrum of sectors. 23% work in the banking sector. Other key sectors include industry & manufacturing (12%), professional services (10%), insurance (9%) and technology, media & telecommunications (7%). Companies from the energy & infrastructure, retail, life sciences & pharmaceuticals, healthcare, public sector, property and other sectors are also represented.

The survey was conducted in July and August 2026 and examines how companies identify, assess and manage political risks, what impact these have on their business operations, and how they respond to them.

About the global EY organization

The global EY organization is a leader in assurance, tax, transaction and advisory services. We leverage our experience, knowledge and services to help build trust and confidence in the capital markets and in economies all over the world. We are ideally equipped for this task — with well trained employees, strong teams, excellent services and outstanding client relations. Our global purpose is to drive progress and make a difference by building a better working world — for our people, for our clients and for our communities.

The global EY organization refers to all member firms of Ernst & Young Global Limited (EYG). Each EYG member firm is a separate legal entity and has no liability for another such entity’s acts or omissions. Ernst & Young Global Limited, a UK company limited by guarantee, does not provide services to clients. Information about how EY collects and uses personal data and a description of the rights individuals have under data protection legislation are available via ey.com/privacy. For more information about our organization, please visit ey.com.

EY’s organization is represented in Switzerland by Ernst & Young Ltd, Basel, with 10 offices across Switzerland, and in Liechtenstein by Ernst & Young AG, Vaduz. In this publication, “EY” and “we” refer to Ernst & Young Ltd, Basel, a member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited.