Note that, as others have said, these executive only sold 4% and 17% of their holdings, respectively. It seems rather unlikely that they would risk so much for

Note that, as others have said, these executive only sold 4% and 17% of their holdings, respectively. It seems rather unlikely that they would risk so much for a rather negligible profit. Regarding your question: insider trading is pretty well-policed. Conviction rate isn't really meaningful (but I'd estimate it's well above 3/4). What would be interesting is the rate of discovery, which is unfortunately impossible to know, because it's a "victimless" crime: nobody knows they've been harmed, and therefore it's impossible to find instances of insider trading without (usually) also finding the culprits. But it's a pretty good guess that prosecution of insider trading is better today than it has ever been. Because all data is now available in digital form and can be sifted through with all sorts of advanced statistics/machine learning/etc. There's really no escape from this dragnet, because there's no way to trade without those trades showing up in the data. It's only after suspicious trades are discovered that they start following the money.