Large Insolvencies 2026 and the Mandatory 12-Month Forecast

In the second quarter of 2026, 105 companies with more than ten million euros in annual revenue filed for insolvency. That is nearly 40 percent more than the long-term five-year average. The increase is particularly drastic for companies with over 100 million euros in revenue, where proceedings rose by 71 percent. These figures from the current Falkensteg Report show that economic strain has long since reached the established mid-market and large corporations. For managing directors, this means: Anyone who cannot present a reliable, rolling liquidity forecast now faces personal liability in the event of financial distress.

Large Insolvencies 2026: The Facts Behind the Current Wave

The number of large insolvencies remains at a critical level in 2026. While the first half of 2026, with a total of 209 filings in the segment above ten million euros in revenue, is only slightly below the previous year's figure, a look at the five-year average of 75 cases per quarter reveals the true severity. Although the restructuring rate remains high and 64 percent of the affected companies can continue operations, the path there is usually associated with massive losses for the shareholders. In the segment of companies with revenues between ten and 19 million euros, there were 50 filings in the second quarter alone.

Why the Figures from Destatis and Other Analysts Differ

The definition of a large insolvency differs massively depending on the source, which often leads to dangerous misjudgments when evaluating one's own market position. When the Federal Statistical Office (Destatis) reports a 15.6 percent decline in large insolvencies for 2025, this does not contradict the figures from Falkensteg or Allianz Trade. The reason lies in the metric: Destatis draws the line at creditor claims of at least 25 million euros. Falkensteg measures from 10 million euros in annual revenue, Allianz Trade from 50 million euros. To assess the overall economic situation, one must look at total insolvencies: Here, Destatis registered an increase of 10.3 percent for 2025 with 24,064 proceedings, the highest annual figure in a long time. In January 2026, this trend continued with an increase of 4.9 percent.

§ 15a and § 19 InsO: When the Deadline for Filing Insolvency Truly Expires

The statutory deadline for filing an insolvency petition ends no later than three weeks after the onset of illiquidity and six weeks after the onset of over-indebtedness. These deadlines, anchored in § 15a InsO, are not grace periods that can be strategically exhausted. The obligation arises immediately upon the occurrence of the insolvency reason. Anyone who waits without an objective prospect of restructuring is guilty of delaying insolvency. The law is directed at every single member of the representative body. In a GmbH, every managing director is personally liable, regardless of internal departmental divisions. The penalty framework for intentional acts ranges up to three years in prison, flanked by a five-year professional ban as a managing director.

Central to the assessment of over-indebtedness is § 19 InsO. Here, the forecast period for the going-concern prognosis is firmly defined as twelve months. This is a rolling period: Anyone auditing in July 2026 must prove solvency until July 2027. Relying on outdated data or incomplete Excel spreadsheets here is grossly negligent.

§ 1 StaRUG: Why Excel Islands Increase Liability Risks

The law forces managing directors via § 1 StaRUG to establish a functioning early warning system for crises. Such a system must be able to identify developments that threaten the company's existence at an early stage. In the practice of many mid-sized companies, this fails due to the data foundation. If shipping costs, platform fees, and storage costs only appear in the accounting weeks after the month-end closing, and liquidity planning takes place in isolated Excel islands, a legally compliant 12-month forecast is simply impossible. Management steers the company blindly and only learns of an impending shortfall when the overdraft limit is breached.

How Automated Business Monitoring Secures the Liquidity Forecast

Continuous business monitoring merges raw data from all operational sources into an auditable P&L, EBITDA, and liquidity calculation. Instead of manually exporting data from the ERP, marketplaces, and accounting and consolidating it in spreadsheets, a system takes over the end-to-end process: from import via allocation and the P&L cascade to the month-end closing. The result is a robust 13- to 52-week liquidity forecast that withstands the legal requirements for the going-concern prognosis.

Crucial for audit compliance is traceability. Every key figure must be auditable down to the source. If the system performs cost modeling down to the individual invoice line, including versioned shipping, commission, and storage costs per channel and country, this must not be a black box. The path from the source field via the mapping and the tariff to the final formula must be transparent. Such a system scales effortlessly across millions of invoice lines and builds a history that can also be used by AI agents. If energy costs rise or the proportion of expensive leased staff grows, the monitoring immediately shows the isolated effect on the result and liquidity, long before the classic BWA is available. In this way, the legal obligation for early crisis detection becomes a genuine management tool that secures the operational capability of the executive board.