A new website called AILayoff.live promises real-time tracking of AI-driven job displacement. The dashboard displays a running counter of jobs displaced by AI, a list of companies replacing humans with AI, and projections from Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, and the World Economic Forum. It updates every six hours. It is the first public, continuously updated aggregation of what has been, until now, a topic of diffuse reports and academic papers.
The headline number is zero. The counter for “Jobs Displaced by AI” reads 0. Cumulative since January 2023. The tracker also shows 0 for “New AI Jobs Created” since January 2024. These are placeholder figures — the site appears to be loading data from APIs that have not yet populated, or the counters are awaiting manual curation. The “Companies Replacing Humans” section lists 42 companies, but the “Publicly confirmed” count is also missing. The tracker is a prototype. It is not yet a working data product.
That is the first thing to say about AILayoff.live. The second is that even in its incomplete state, the site reveals something important: the gap between the rhetoric and the data.
The tracker’s “2025–2026 Snapshot” panel cites 29,570 tech layoffs in 2025, 300 million jobs exposed to AI, and 85 million jobs displaced by 2025. These numbers come from Goldman Sachs, McKinsey, and the WEF. They are projections, not measurements. The 85 million figure is a forecast from the WEF’s Future of Jobs 2025 report. The 300 million number is from Goldman’s research arm, updated in February 2026 to show a 40% increase in generative AI exposure since their 2023 estimates. The tracker does not distinguish between projected and confirmed displacement. It presents them in the same panel.
The actual confirmed displacement, as tracked by the site’s own company list, is much smaller. The 42 companies listed together account for roughly 155,000 jobs cut where AI was cited as a factor. BT Group leads with 55,000, citing operations automation and AI assistants. Amazon cut 27,000, citing warehouse automation and Alexa AI. Meta cut 21,000, citing AI-driven efficiency restructuring. Google cut 12,000, citing AI consolidation and the Bard/Gemini pivot. Microsoft cut 10,000, citing Copilot integration. These are real layoffs. But the AI role in each is often partial — a factor among many, rarely the sole cause.
The tracker’s company list reveals a pattern. Most of the layoffs occurred in 2023 and early 2024. The list includes BT’s May 2023 cuts, Amazon’s January 2023 cuts, Meta’s November 2022 to April 2023 cuts. Only a handful of entries are from 2025 or 2026: Salesforce’s February 2026 announcement that AgentForce would replace 3,000 support roles by Q3, and Klarna’s 700-agent reduction in February 2024, which the company later reported as a 93% AI customer service operation. The acceleration that the tracker’s ”↑ 0 /hour • accelerating” label promises is not yet visible in the data.
This is the core tension. The tracker’s projections suggest a wave. Its confirmed data shows a trickle. The gap is not a bug in the tracker. It is the actual state of the world.
The most useful part of AILayoff.live is the “Latest News” feed. It aggregates real reporting. The Anthropic research from March 2026 found that 75% of programmer tasks are now covered by AI, but reported no unemployment spike yet. The Harvard Business School research from February 2026 showed rising demand for AI skills alongside declining demand for structured, repetitive roles. The EU proposal for an “AI displacement tax” from February 2026 suggests policymakers are preparing for a wave that has not yet arrived. The McKinsey report from February 2026 projects 12 million Americans will need to switch occupations by 2030, with AI adoption accelerating three times faster than expected.
The site’s “Is Your Job at Risk?” feature, powered by Oxford research and real layoff data, is the most concrete part of the product. It offers a personalized risk score based on occupation. That is a useful tool. It is also a symptom of the anxiety the tracker is built on.
AILayoff.live is not a reliable data source yet. It is a signal of demand. Someone built a real-time tracker for AI job displacement because enough people want to watch that number tick up. The site’s design — the live counter, the acceleration indicator, the “accelerating” label — mimics the aesthetics of COVID-19 dashboards and population clocks. It treats job displacement as a natural phenomenon to be monitored in real time, like a weather system.
That framing is itself a political choice. The tracker does not distinguish between jobs eliminated by AI and jobs eliminated by companies using AI as a justification. It does not track whether displaced workers find new roles. It does not track whether the “97 million new roles” the WEF projects by 2025 will actually materialize. It measures one side of the ledger.
The most honest number on the site is the one that is missing. The “New AI Jobs Created” counter reads 0. That is probably wrong. But it is a more honest placeholder than the projections that fill the rest of the dashboard.
What the tracker shows, unintentionally, is that the AI displacement story is still being written. The 42 companies on the list are real. The 155,000 jobs are real. The projections from Goldman, McKinsey, and the WEF are real estimates from serious institutions. But the tracker’s own data does not yet support the acceleration narrative its design implies. The wave is forecast. It has not arrived.
The question for AI builders is what to do with that gap. The tracker will eventually fill in its counters. The data will accumulate. The projections will either converge with reality or diverge further. The tracker is a bet that the convergence will be upward. The design assumes acceleration. The data so far shows a slow, uneven, and often overstated shift. The tracker is worth watching. It is not worth panicking over. Not yet.