When you start a lost-and-found company you discover, very quickly, that almost nobody has good data on this. There's no Statistics Canada bulletin titled "things you forgot on the bus." What we have is a patchwork of airline reports, transit-authority lost-and-found logs, insurance industry estimates, and a handful of consumer surveys.
Here's an honest summary of what the available data actually shows in Canada, with sources where we have them, and clearly flagged caveats where we're estimating.
Air travel
Canadian airlines and airports don't publish unified mishandled-luggage stats, but the international SITA Baggage IT Insights report — which most large carriers participate in — gives us a usable global proxy.
In recent years, the global rate of mishandled bags has hovered between 6 and 8 bags per 1,000 passengers. For a Canadian context: Toronto Pearson alone moves roughly 50 million passengers a year, so even at the better end of that range, that's hundreds of thousands of mishandled-bag events at a single airport annually. The vast majority — over 95% — are returned within 48 hours via tracking.
The harder problem is the small slice that isn't returned: usually because the bag tag was destroyed, the contents had no internal ID, or the routing information was wrong. That's the segment where a privacy-respecting, finder-readable tag actually helps.
Public transit
Transit authorities run lost-and-found offices and most of them publish loose statistics:
- TTC (Toronto) receives roughly 60,000 lost-item submissions annually, of which a large minority are returned to owners. Phones, wallets, and bags top the list.
- STM (Montreal) processes a similar volume, with seasonal spikes around school terms.
- TransLink (Vancouver) has reported in the tens of thousands per year as well.
Across the major Canadian transit systems, the consistent pattern is that items with any owner-contact info attached are returned at much higher rates than items without. This isn't a marketing claim; it's a recurring observation in transit lost-and-found annual reports.
Hotels and short-term rentals
International travel-insurance research (Allianz, AIG, etc.) consistently finds that around 1 in 4 hotel guests forgets at least one item per stay — phone chargers, toiletries, books, headphones, the occasional laptop. Of those, perhaps a quarter are recovered. The recovery gap is mostly a "the guest didn't realize, didn't call, or the hotel couldn't reach them" failure rather than a "the item is gone" failure.
The same research shows the recovery rate is much higher for items with the guest's contact information attached at the time of loss, vs. items with no identifier.
Personal-loss surveys
The most-cited consumer figure — that the average person loses 9 items a day for a total of around 200,000 items in a lifetime — comes from a 2017 IKEA-commissioned survey across multiple countries. It's a survey, with all the methodological caveats that implies, but it's directionally consistent with insurance and transit data: small losses are constant, accumulate, and most people don't bother reporting them.
A more conservative figure from US consumer-product research (Pixie Technologies) puts the average person spending 2.5 days a year looking for misplaced items. That number is more believable as a behavioural signal, even if the dollar value depends on whose hourly rate you assume.
Wallets
Multiple international "lost wallet" experiments — Reader's Digest in 2013, the journal Science in 2019 — have shown that about 40-50% of dropped wallets are returned in higher-trust countries, and the return rate goes UP when the wallet contains more money. (Counterintuitive, but well-documented.) Canada was one of the higher-return-rate countries in the 2019 study.
Implication: most "found a wallet" outcomes depend on a kind stranger being given a frictionless way to do the right thing. The barrier isn't strangers being bad; the barrier is owners not making it easy to be good to them.
Pets
Per the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies, around 30% of dogs and 35% of cats brought into Canadian shelters are lost rather than abandoned, and microchipped animals are returned to their owners at meaningfully higher rates. NFC pet tags are not a microchip replacement (microchips are read by a vet's scanner, not a phone), but they do provide a finder-tap-and-message channel that microchips don't — which is most useful in the first hours after a pet wanders, before anyone gets to a vet.
What our own data shows (caveats apply)
We've been running for a relatively short time, so this is small-sample stuff:
- About 80% of recovered items go through "kind stranger" channels (random tap, message, owner reply, return) — not through theft recoveries or institutional lost-and-founds.
- Average time from loss to first finder tap is roughly 36 hours for luggage, much shorter for keys (median under 6 hours).
- Of items that get tapped at all, the eventual return rate is over 80%. The bigger funnel problem is items that are never tapped — typically because the bag is in a closet at someone's house and they haven't decided what to do with it yet.
So how should you think about it?
Three honest takeaways:
- Most lost items are not stolen. They are forgotten, mis-routed, or set down. The recovery problem is mostly a communication problem.
- Items with even minimal owner-contact info attached have meaningfully higher return rates. This is the consistent finding across every dataset we've looked at.
- The right tag is the tag that doesn't expose your address. A "return to 123 Main St" tag is solving an 1850 problem with 1850 tools. A finder-friendly, privacy-respecting NFC tag is just the modern version of the same idea.
If anyone has better Canadian-specific data we should add to this post, write to info@lochtags.com — we'd like to keep this updated.
Got thoughts or a story to share? Drop us a line — we read everything.