What 224,000 Guest Reviews Reveal About Hotel Performance During the 2026 FIFA World Cup
Shiji's benchmark of 224,171 reviews across 1,819 hotels in 14 host cities finds GRI improved in both the US and Mexico, with Mexico outperforming on all key metrics and F&B scoring a 9.27-point gain.
Photo by Shiji
The 2026 FIFA World Cup created an unusually demanding operating period for hotels across North America. High occupancy, international arrivals, and concentrated event traffic all increased pressure on hotel teams.
However, Shiji’s World Cup hotel reputation benchmark shows that guest satisfaction remained resilient. The analysis covers 1,819 hotels and 224,171 reviews across 14 host cities. It compares the World Cup period with the same dates in 2025.
Across the full sample, review volume increased by 10.9%. At the same time, the Global Review Index™ increased in both countries. US hotels improved by 0.16 percentage points, while Mexican hotels improved by 0.45 points.
The overall result was therefore positive. Nevertheless, the country, department and city data reveal important differences beneath the headline.
Takeaways
Hotel reputation improved in both countries despite World Cup operating pressure.
Mexico outperformed the US on GRI, review growth, and negative review reduction.
Mexico’s 9.27-point Food and Beverage improvement was the strongest departmental result.
City performance varied widely, while match volume had little relationship with GRI change.
Written sentiment revealed value and service concerns that were not visible in the overall US GRI.
US and Mexico hotel performance compared
Mexico recorded the stronger overall reputation result during the tournament. Its GRI reached 86.5%, compared with 82.6% in the United States.
Moreover, Mexico’s year-on-year improvement was almost three times larger. Mexican hotels gained 0.45 percentage points, compared with 0.16 points for US hotels.
Mexico outperformed the United States across every headline reputation metric during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, recording a higher GRI, stronger review growth, and better department scores.
The differences in review volume were especially significant. US hotels received 152,660 reviews, down 9.8% from 169,192 in 2025. In contrast, Mexican hotels generated 71,511 reviews, up 117% from 32,955.
Despite this increase, Mexico’s negative review share fell from 7.9% to 3.7%. Its positive review share also rose from 83.8% to 92.7%.
The US result was more stable. Positive reviews increased from 75.4% to 76.1%, while the negative share remained unchanged at 13%.
Therefore, Mexico did more than preserve its reputation during higher review activity. It improved both its GRI and the balance of positive and negative feedback.
Department results show different operational strengths
The country comparison becomes more detailed at department level. Mexico achieved higher World Cup scores in Food and Beverage, Service and Cleanliness.
US hotels improved across every measured department, demonstrating broad operational consistency rather than reliance on one standout area.
Mexico’s Food and Beverage score was the most notable result in the full benchmark. It increased from 81.2% in 2025 to 90.5% during the World Cup. That represents a gain of 9.27 percentage points.
No other measured department recorded an improvement of the same scale. This suggests that restaurant, breakfast, bar and related service operations were major contributors to Mexico’s result.
US hotels recorded more evenly distributed gains. Service improved by 1.71 percentage points. Value increased by 1.68 points, while Room improved by 1.54 points. Food and Beverage increased by 1.19 points.
These figures indicate that the US result was supported by broad operational stability rather than one exceptional department. However, Mexico’s stronger performance was helped by a substantial improvement in Food and Beverage.
Mexico’s exceptional Food & Beverage performance was the benchmark’s largest departmental improvement, increasing by 9.27 percentage points.
GRI improved, but US guest comments became more critical
The numerical GRI results should also be compared with written review sentiment.
In the United States, overall reputation improved. However, positive sentiment declined across several specific topics. Value sentiment fell from 47% positive to 34%. Room sentiment declined by 10.6 percentage points. Security fell by 11.2 points, while Wi-Fi dropped by 12 points. Accessibility recorded the largest decline, at 20.6 points.
This is not necessarily contradictory. GRI reflects the overall review score, while semantic analysis examines what guests wrote about individual topics.
As a result, a hotel can maintain a strong overall rating while receiving more detailed criticism about price, connectivity or particular parts of the stay.
For operators, the distinction is important. Headline GRI should be monitored alongside topic-level sentiment. Otherwise, emerging service or value concerns may remain hidden within a stable overall score.
Higher-category hotels showed greater resilience in the US
Hotel category also influenced the results.
In the United States, three-star hotels improved by only 0.04 percentage points. Four-star hotels gained 0.24 points, while five-star hotels improved by 0.49 points.
This suggests that higher-category US properties were better able to protect or improve their reputation during peak demand. They may have benefited from deeper staffing structures, more service capacity or greater operational flexibility.
Mexico followed a different pattern. Three-star hotels improved by 0.38 percentage points, while four-star hotels increased by 0.88 points. However, five-star hotels declined by 0.56 points, from 90.0% to 89.5%.
Therefore, luxury resilience was not consistent across both countries. The result was stronger in the US, while Mexico’s largest category improvement came from four-star hotels.
City results varied more than national averages
National averages conceal substantial variation between host cities.
Philadelphia recorded the strongest improvement. Its GRI increased from 81.1% to 83.2%, a gain of 2.06 percentage points.
Guadalajara followed with an increase of 1.86 points. Seattle ranked third, improving by 0.88 points.
At the other end of the benchmark, Monterrey declined by 1.23 points. San Francisco fell by 0.96 points, while Kansas City declined by 0.61 points.
Hotel reputation performance varied significantly between host cities, demonstrating that operational execution mattered more than the number of World Cup matches hosted.
New York, which hosted eight matches and the final, increased its GRI by 0.43 percentage points to 83.6%. Los Angeles also hosted eight matches and improved by 0.52 points. Meanwhile, Atlanta increased by 0.37 points.
These results show that large event volumes did not automatically damage hotel reputation.
Match volume was not a meaningful predictor
The statistical relationship between the number of matches hosted and GRI change was -0.11. This represents a very weak negative correlation.
In practical terms, hosting more matches did not reliably produce lower reputation scores.
For example, Philadelphia achieved the largest improvement after hosting six matches. Guadalajara ranked second after hosting four. New York improved after hosting eight.
Conversely, Monterrey recorded the largest decline despite hosting only four matches.
Therefore, tournament intensity alone does not explain the results. Local demand conditions may still matter. However, staffing, service execution and departmental performance appear to have had a greater influence.
Guest mix shifted towards solo travel
The tournament also changed the composition of hotel demand.
In the United States, the share of solo travelers increased from 16.2% to 21.9%. This was a gain of 5.7 percentage points. Meanwhile, family travel fell from 38.3% to 30.3%.
The change was even larger in Mexico. Solo travel increased from 18.0% to 35.8%, while family travel declined by 15.8 percentage points.
This shift has operational implications. Solo travelers may have different expectations around food and beverage, check-in speed, connectivity, and communal spaces. Therefore, hotels preparing for future events should not assume that peak leisure demand will be dominated by families or groups.
The World Cup changed hotel demand patterns, with solo travel increasing sharply across both the United States and Mexico while family travel declined.
Conclusion
The World Cup hotel reputation benchmark shows that hotels across the US and Mexico generally absorbed tournament demand without damaging guest satisfaction.
However, the results were not uniform. Mexico recorded the stronger national performance, supported by higher sentiment and a major Food and Beverage gain. The US delivered a smaller but broadly distributed improvement across service, value and rooms.
Most importantly, match volume did not determine performance. The strongest and weakest city results appeared across markets with both high and moderate tournament exposure.
The data therefore points to operational execution as the more important variable. Hotels that maintained service consistency, responded to changing guest profiles, and monitored detailed sentiment were better positioned to protect reputation during peak demand.
About Shiji Group
Shiji is a global technology company dedicated to providing innovative solutions for the hospitality industry, ensuring seamless operations for hoteliers day and night.
Built on the Shiji Platform, the only truly global hotel technology platform, Shiji’s cloud-based portfolio includes Property Management System, Point-of-Sale, guest engagement, distribution, payments, and data intelligence solutions for over 91,000 hotels worldwide, including the largest chains.
For more information, visit www.shijigroup.com.