No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Amazon Fraud Detector vs Kount comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon Fraud Detector
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Kount
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
15th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of Amazon Fraud Detector is 1.6%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kount is 2.3%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fraud Detection and Prevention Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Kount2.3%
Amazon Fraud Detector1.6%
Other96.1%
Fraud Detection and Prevention
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer1461372 - PeerSpot reviewer
Graduate Analytics Consultant at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Quickly and reliably identifies potentially fraudulent activity
The problem I was facing, from a machine learning perspective, it only had a supervised learning capability. You would have to provide your data live, but in fraud, the pattern of the fraudsters keeps changing and it's impossible to provide data labels. That's where the user unsupervised learning comes in handy — you don't have to tell them, "okay, this is fraud and this is not fraud." If unsupervised learning was also incorporated with Amazon SageMaker, that would be really cool. I am talking about anomaly detection algorithms, like isolation, forest, or anything on the neural network side for anomaly detection, including autoencoders. These are some things which companies would really like to use. There was also a problem with latency. In fraud detection, everything needs to be happening in real-time, but some of the algorithms ran for three to four minutes, which is not a viable option.
Chris Zappato - PeerSpot reviewer
Fraud Analyst at Pinterest
Features a large database of fraud signals and indicators to stop fraud in its tracks
At my old company, I used to use a tool called Sift. It's another great tool, but I prefer Kount. The major differences between the two solutions are how they're laid out and how fast you can gather as much information as possible. I personally prefer Kount — that's my personal preference. I've worked with both platforms for many years. I personally prefer Kount for the way that they display information and for the variety and flexibility they offer when it comes to the rules — from very simple to very complex. Kount is better designed for catching fraud, detecting fraud, and preventing fraud. Sift is also great; you will not go wrong if you go with Sift, but I personally prefer Kount.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Overall, we got some really good results; we got roughly a 77% recall, which meant 77% of the total fraud was actually picked up by Amazon Fraud Detector."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to create your own ruleset and edit it whenever you want. Their reporting functionality is very helpful. It's really robust."
"There were other people and other departments using other software, but Kount stood out in payroll because it was already proven and even the payments division was using it."
"We avoid losses in multiple ways with Kount."
"We have 100% seen ROI; it helped us quickly identify our areas of fraud, stop us from losing money, start doing business smarter, save good customers, boost our sales, and minimize fraud at the same time."
"It's an in-depth, all-in-one solution."
"The initial setup was absolutely straightforward. Within a week I was fully working."
 

Cons

"There was also a problem with latency. In fraud detection, everything needs to be happening in real-time, but some of the algorithms ran for three to four minutes, which is not a viable option."
"There was also a problem with latency. In fraud detection, everything needs to be happening in real-time, but some of the algorithms ran for three to four minutes, which is not a viable option."
"They could do a little bit better with chargeback management."
"They could do a little bit better with chargeback management. There are other solutions out there that I've heard about, like Accertify that have a better chargeback platform where they're integrated more with the banks or in terms of how the workflow is and how you can respond to chargebacks."
"The rule system and automation could be expanded a little bit more."
"The time that is taken to go to Kount and come back should be in the order of around 100 milliseconds or less, and our context was taking around 200 to 300 milliseconds."
"The rule system and automation could be expanded a little bit more."
"The time that is taken to go to Kount and come back should be in the order of around 100 milliseconds or less. And our context was taking around 200 to 300 milliseconds. We didn't want the extra load of 100 milliseconds to happen, so if the two rounds of stability could be cut to one, that would be very helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"I think the pricing is great — I think it's totally worth what they're charging because the benefits are great."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions are best for your needs.
885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Retailer
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

AWS Cloud9 IDE, Cloud9 IDE
Midigator
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
CD Baby, Crate & Barrel, Domino's Pizza, Dunkin' Brands, Hydrobuilder, Jagex, JOANN Fabric & Crafts, Leatherman, Micro Center, Staples, The Iconic, The Source, The Vitamin Shoppe, TickPick and WebJet.
Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatMetrix, NICE, BioCatch and others in Fraud Detection and Prevention. Updated: March 2026.
885,667 professionals have used our research since 2012.