WFA Research
What remote job postings actually state about where an employer will consider hiring, across 81 countries and territories.
Updated September 3, 2026
Remote describes where the work is performed. It does not necessarily tell you where the employer is willing or able to hire.
We analysed 9,745 remote job listings from 1,687 employers where the posting stated its geographic hiring scope explicitly, to measure what employers actually write.
This measures stated geographic hiring scope. It is not legal work authorisation, visa eligibility, payroll capability or a hiring decision, and the wording throughout is chosen so it cannot be read as any of those.
Every listing falls into exactly one of these four categories, and they sum to the whole sample.
Shares of the 9,745 listings in the snapshot. These categories are mutually exclusive and add to 100%.
| Stated scope | Listings | Share of sample |
|---|---|---|
| Listed as open worldwide | 570 | 5.8% |
| Named countries only | 8,529 | 87.5% |
| Named a region only | 462 | 4.7% |
| Named both a country and a region | 184 | 1.9% |
Two further counts overlap with those categories and with each other, so they are reported separately rather than added: 8,713 listings name at least one country, and 646 name at least one region.
Shading a map by how many listings name each country shows the shape of the sample immediately.
Grey means the country was not named in this sample, which is not the same as an absence of remote work there. Countries named only inside a region — "EMEA", "LATAM" — are not shaded, because deciding which countries a region covers would be our inference rather than the employer's statement. Shaded countries link to the jobs. Geometry from Natural Earth, public domain. Browse remote jobs by country →
Ranked by how many listings name them. Share is of the 8,713 listings that named at least one country, not of the whole sample.
| Country or territory | Listings naming it | Share of country-naming listings | Unique employers |
|---|---|---|---|
| United States | 6,217 | 71.4% | 1,237 |
| Canada | 705 | 8.1% | 159 |
| United Kingdom | 440 | 5.0% | 170 |
| India | 217 | 2.5% | 77 |
| Germany | 214 | 2.5% | 94 |
| Spain | 123 | 1.4% | 46 |
| Netherlands | 119 | 1.4% | 31 |
| France | 91 | 1.0% | 33 |
| Brazil | 91 | 1.0% | 39 |
| Argentina | 87 | 1.0% | 23 |
| Mexico | 85 | 1.0% | 45 |
| Poland | 84 | 1.0% | 31 |
| Philippines | 64 | 0.7% | 29 |
| Ireland | 62 | 0.7% | 25 |
| Australia | 62 | 0.7% | 38 |
| Japan | 59 | 0.7% | 23 |
| Ukraine | 56 | 0.6% | 15 |
| Singapore | 52 | 0.6% | 18 |
| Colombia | 41 | 0.5% | 16 |
| Czechia | 41 | 0.5% | 5 |
| Romania | 37 | 0.4% | 10 |
| Cyprus | 30 | 0.3% | 3 |
| China | 29 | 0.3% | 20 |
| Belgium | 28 | 0.3% | 8 |
| Italy | 26 | 0.3% | 18 |
| Sweden | 26 | 0.3% | 18 |
| Portugal | 25 | 0.3% | 13 |
| Serbia | 24 | 0.3% | 6 |
| Israel | 21 | 0.2% | 7 |
| Denmark | 21 | 0.2% | 12 |
| Nigeria | 20 | 0.2% | 3 |
| United Arab Emirates | 20 | 0.2% | 10 |
| Armenia | 20 | 0.2% | 3 |
| Costa Rica | 15 | 0.2% | 7 |
| Estonia | 14 | 0.2% | 5 |
| Luxembourg | 14 | 0.2% | 2 |
| Taiwan | 13 | 0.1% | 8 |
| South Africa | 12 | 0.1% | 10 |
| Bulgaria | 12 | 0.1% | 9 |
| Switzerland | 12 | 0.1% | 7 |
| Hungary | 11 | 0.1% | 9 |
| Austria | 11 | 0.1% | 10 |
| South Korea | 10 | 0.1% | 5 |
| Malaysia | 10 | 0.1% | 6 |
Countries named by fewer than ten listings are omitted from this table and included in the CSV. All 81 appear on the map.
These figures count listings. An employer with many open roles contributes more observations than an employer with one, which matters when reading any share on this page.
The sample holds 9,745 listings from 1,687 employers. The ten largest contribute 12.6% of it and the twenty-five largest 21.8%; the single largest, Leland, accounts for 178 listings on its own.
The country table therefore also carries a unique-employer count, so a country carried by one large employer can be told apart from one named across many.
The same countries, weighted by employer rather than by listing. Read alongside the listing counts above rather than instead of them.
Where a posting names a region rather than countries, it is counted as that region. It is never expanded into member countries: deciding which countries "EMEA" covers would be our inference, not the employer's statement.
| Region, as written in the posting | Listings | Unique employers |
|---|---|---|
| EUROPE | 258 | 78 |
| EMEA | 108 | 41 |
| NORTH AMERICA | 103 | 29 |
| LATAM | 77 | 32 |
| EU | 54 | 23 |
| APAC | 52 | 19 |
| AFRICA | 20 | 16 |
| AMERICAS | 20 | 7 |
| SOUTH AMERICA | 10 | 8 |
| ASIA | 5 | 5 |
| MENA | 5 | 3 |
| CARIBBEAN | 1 | 1 |
| EAST ASIA | 1 | 1 |
| NORDICS | 1 | 1 |
| OCEANIA | 1 | 1 |
| SOUTHEAST ASIA | 1 | 1 |
14 listings explicitly mention offering visa sponsorship and 480 explicitly rule it out. The remaining 9,251 say nothing either way.
Silence is not evidence of absence. A posting that does not mention sponsorship has not declined to offer it, and these counts describe what was written rather than what any employer would do.
780 listings state a work-authorisation requirement, which is 8.0% of the sample.
That is too small a share to describe the rest, and the absence of such language is not read here as an absence of a requirement. It is the reason this report measures stated geographic scope rather than eligibility: "remote, but you must already be authorised to work here" is exactly the case the data cannot settle.
Employment arrangement is only meaningful where a role actually crosses a border. 1,174 listings in the snapshot do — worldwide, or naming more than one country or region — and 373 of those state an arrangement.
Restricted to cross-border roles on purpose: a single-country listing can perfectly well be a contractor role, and counting it here would say nothing about hiring across borders. Each share is of all 1,174 cross-border listings. A listing can state more than one arrangement, so these are not intended to sum to 100%.
It can tell you what geographic scope employers explicitly stated, which countries are named most often, how often a listing says worldwide, and which regions are explicitly mentioned.
Every figure on this page comes from a single snapshot taken on September 3, 2026, methodology version 1.0. The page, the charts and the CSV all read that one file, so they cannot disagree with each other, and a refresh is published as a new snapshot with a new date rather than changing these numbers in place.
9,745 active listings from 1,687 employers. Active listings whose employer stated its geographic hiring scope in the posting. Listings where the scope was inferred are excluded.
Listings are collected directly from employers' own applicant tracking systems — greenhouse, ashby, workday, lever, recruitee, smartrecruiters — and never from an aggregator or a third-party board. That collection skews towards employers publishing on a modern applicant tracking system, which favours technology companies and English-language postings. Read every figure as describing the remote job market WFA Digital observes, not every remote job in the world.
Only listings where the employer stated its hiring scope in the posting. Listings where a model inferred a scope are excluded from every figure here, however reasonable the inference looked: an inference about geography is our sentence and not the employer's. Each classification stores the phrase it was read from, so any row can be traced back to the words in the posting.
The four scope categories — worldwide, country only, region only, country and region — are mutually exclusive, and the build refuses to write a snapshot in which they do not sum exactly to the sample. "Names at least one country" and "names at least one region" are separate overlapping counts, reported on their own and never added to the four.
Scope shares are of the 9,745 listings in the sample. Country shares are of the 8,713 listings that named at least one country, which is the only denominator under which they can be compared. Arrangement shares are of the 1,174 cross-border listings. Each share names its denominator where it appears.
Country codes are resolved to names through the same table the rest of the site uses for country pages, so no raw ISO code reaches the map or the table. All 81 codes in this snapshot resolve.
The unit of observation is the listing. Employers are unevenly represented: the ten largest account for 12.6% of the sample. Unique-employer counts are published alongside the listing counts for every country and region so both readings are available.
Legal work authorisation, visa eligibility, payroll capability, entity availability, tax compliance and the final hiring decision are all outside what a posting can establish. Where a field exists but covers a small share of listings — work authorisation at 8.0% — the analysis is limited to that subset and says so rather than generalising.
Every listing says which countries it can hire from before you apply. Browse by where you live or by field.