Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

FICO Falcon Platform vs InAuth vs ThreatMetrix 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:
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of FICO Falcon Platform is 7.6%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of InAuth is 0.6%, down from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 11.3%, down from 14.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fraud Detection and Prevention Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ThreatMetrix11.3%
FICO Falcon Platform7.6%
InAuth0.6%
Other80.5%
Fraud Detection and Prevention
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2511618 - PeerSpot reviewer
Real-time capability, consortium data model but offline analysis of transactions is not flexible
FICO users are business users, not developers. When setting up rules or parameters, some coding is required, and the learning curve is quite steep. This is a disadvantage of FICO. Additionally, the offline analysis of transactions is not flexible. Transactions need to be flagged as fraud to show up in the analysis, making it difficult to identify false negatives. The Identity Resolution Engine (IRE), an extension to FICO Falcon Platform, is helpful. However, integration with FICO Falcon Fraud Manager can be challenging due to its rigid template and data format requirements. This can cause delays in development and integration, potentially postponing projects by a month or two. AI is another thing they could improve is how they create the data model for my bank's detection data. From what I understand, they already have the capability to do that. But the data being processed in my bank, the ones they can process, is not really much. Maybe it's just a mistake on my part. But in terms of AI other than machine learning that they've already implemented, I have not seen any significant use case.
WN
Scalable and stable device identification and analysis solution for fraud detection, with reasonable pricing
I don't see anything that needs to be improved in InAuth currently. My advice to others who may want to use this solution is for them to use it with a Samsung device. InAuth works fine. Its features are working. I'm giving InAuth a rating of eight out of ten.
Sohom Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Enables to identify and analyze real-time incidents and mitigate risks
The setup is not complex. It is pretty standard. I rate the ease of setup a nine out of ten. The deployment time depends on the applications and environment into which we integrate it. The product provides a lot of API documentation. The product is cloud-based. One or two people are enough to deploy the solution. We need some maintenance when new versions or patches need to be upgraded. It requires minimal maintenance.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It can make real-time decisions or real-time declines."
"FICO is working on a local model specifically for Brazil, whereas tools from Oracle and other vendors are only developed for general use. I haven't seen any other vendors who think like that until now."
"InAuth is a stable and scalable solution that supports many devices and platforms such as Samsung, LG, etc. It also has very reasonable pricing."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable thing is about the IP. They have a database of malicious IP addresses against which they check. They have a huge database for routed devices and the devices that have been used in the past to commit fraud. They have extensive historical records of all of that information, and that's probably the most valuable thing about ThreatMetrix. Over the years, they have been collecting and persisting globally across all the banking and financial services. They have been storing all this information. It is this stored information that I and my team find valuable; it is not so much their technology. If you are running it on a simulator and trying to maliciously clone and copy IP addresses and stuff like that, they have a bunch of technologies, like routes section and all the other stuff. It is just that they have something that no one else can deal with, that is, massive amounts of big data about the malicious IP addresses, malicious device fingerprinting, the fingerprinting router devices, and the fingerprints. You can query against this stored information to find out whether your app is in a good, nice environment. If yes, you get a green light. The last time I checked, there were about 400 or 500 features that they can stack against, which is pretty extensive. They give you a score against all those features for every application that you installed on it. It is pretty good in that sense."
"The solution can be easily integrated with applications."
"There is excellent documentation available."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable feature the solution has is that it is able to do a fairly accurate fraud assessment of a credit card transaction based on a variety of parameters configured by the merchant."
 

Cons

"When setting up rules or parameters, some coding is required, and the learning curve is quite steep."
"I've had bad experiences with FICO support. At the bank, we've faced critical problems where we only had minutes to find the solution, and it's hard to explain quickly. We contacted FICO, but they told us it was beyond their scope of support. They try to triage the call by asking us how much money we're losing, but I can't go into that."
"The initial setup for InAuth could be improved, as it's not straightforward. Weak connectivity issues and user-friendliness are also areas for improvement for this solution."
"SDK is probably where the biggest issue is. The SDK configuration is a bit lacking. If you are integrating it into your workflow, it is very cumbersome and very difficult to integrate. You have to understand and be an expert in low-level mobile applications to integrate this stuff. Integration should be easy based on what they are providing, but unfortunately, it is not. It is very difficult. My work has been trying to simplify the integration process because integrations bring a lot of value. Most companies don't see their value because it is such a difficult process. For integration, you have to get it right as well, but it is very difficult to get it right because they don't help you in tuning your future parameters. Because of this, it is very difficult to tune your future parameters and your risk score. If you are Uber, your risk score will be very different from a banking client that is pushing funds. These two things need to be improved for me. The rest is pretty good."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"One limitation is it only maintains six months' worth of data. It would be nice if it went back even further to help us really identify and flush out patterns that go on longer."
"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"The tool is very expensive."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The functionality is fine, but the price is getting more expensive."
"FICO is one of the best fraud detection platforms. However, a small bank might find it too expensive. In that case, I would agree it's probably not worth it. However, it's a no-brainer if your bank has 50 million accounts and 7 million credit card transactions daily."
"Pricing for this solution is reasonable."
"I am not aware of the price. I have always come in after it has been negotiated. The clients do get a return on their investment. It mitigated a massive DDoS, and it definitely detects fraudulent activities on banking platforms. They have definitely got their ROI back because there is continued investment in ThreatMetrix over time."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions are best for your needs.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
44%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Manufacturing Company
3%
No data available
Financial Services Firm
48%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
5%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with FICO Falcon Platform?
FICO users are business users, not developers. When setting up rules or parameters, some coding is required, and the ...
What is your primary use case for FICO Falcon Platform?
I use FICO Falcon app manager. I think it was from 2019, but I'm not quite sure. Maybe it was 2017. I'm a customer of...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your primary use case for ThreatMetrix?
The tool is integrated with the other solutions. It can be used to gauge threats and risks in the traffic, applicatio...
 

Also Known As

Falcon Platform
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Bain Capital Ventures
Trip Advisor, Stone Hub, TD Bank, Rabobank, GoPro
Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatMetrix, NICE, FICO and others in Fraud Detection and Prevention. Updated: August 2025.
867,349 professionals have used our research since 2012.