Forter vs Kount vs ThreatMetrix comparison

Read 3 Kount reviews

444 Views
444 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Read 8 ThreatMetrix reviews

2,317 Views
2,271 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Forter

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Forter, Kount, and ThreatMetrix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatMetrix, NICE, FICO and others in Fraud Detection and Prevention.

To learn more, read our detailed Fraud Detection and Prevention Report (Updated: August 2025).

Fraud Detection and Prevention

August 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 868,654 peers since 2012

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 October 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of Forter is 3.9%, up from 3.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Kount is 1.4%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 10.9%, down from 14.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Fraud Detection and Prevention Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
ThreatMetrix	10.9%
Forter	3.9%
Kount	1.4%
Other	83.8%

Fraud Detection and Prevention

Featured Reviews

reviewer1460475

Center Lead Developer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees

Great at detecting fraudulent behavior and has reduced our financial losses

This solution is scalable. You can add more users onto it because they raise the level depending on the traffic that you give them. For instance, if I'm going to send 1,000 evaluations every minute and then 10,000 evaluations every minute, the solution needs to be able to adjust. For them, it was quite easy to scale. I was using this solution in a team of seven people. Maintenance was also carried out by the team. We worked with tickets and when we saw that there was a new version or we needed changes that required integration, anyone working on the team could do it.

Read full review

Chris Zappato

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.

Read full review

Sohom Roy

Senior Director at CSS Corp

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Dashboards, customization and the analytics are all good, it's user friendly."

"The initial setup was absolutely straightforward. Within a week I was fully working."

"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."

"It's an in-depth, all-in-one solution."

"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."

"There is excellent documentation available."

"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."

"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."

"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."

"The solution is stable."

Cons

"Lacking granularity on the acceptance/rejection fraud options."

"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."

"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."

"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."

"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."

"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."

"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."

"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."

"The tool is very expensive."

"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."

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."

"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."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

868,654 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Retailer

17%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

15%

Retailer

12%

Financial Services Firm

12%

Healthcare Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

49%

Computer Software Company

10%

Retailer

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Large Enterprise	4

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ThreatMetrix?

An average of 8000 hits a year costs $60,000.

See all answers

What needs improvement with ThreatMetrix?

The tool is very expensive.

See all answers

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...

See all answers

Comparisons

Riskified vs Forter

Compared 44% of the time

Signifyd vs Forter

Compared 18% of the time

Accertify vs Forter

Compared 16% of the time

Sift Digital Trust and Safety vs Forter

Compared 6% of the time

More Forter Competitors

Riskified vs Kount

Compared 60% of the time

More Kount Competitors

BioCatch vs ThreatMetrix

Compared 30% of the time

FICO Falcon Platform vs ThreatMetrix

Compared 8% of the time

Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs ThreatMetrix

Compared 7% of the time

Featurespace ARIC Fraud Hub vs ThreatMetrix

Compared 6% of the time

Nudetect vs ThreatMetrix

Compared 3% of the time

More ThreatMetrix Competitors

Product Reports

Fraud Detection and Prevention

August 2025

Download Forter product report

Download Kount product report

September 2025

Download ThreatMetrix product report

September 2025

Overview

Forter provides instant, guaranteed approve/decline decisions for every transaction, removing the burden and uncertainty of fraud.

The system is designed to treat all orders as “innocent unless proven guilty” to ensure high approval rates and frictionless checkout. Since Forter only charges for approved transactions, our interests are always aligned with yours. Moreover, our confidence in the system’s accuracy means we do not hesitate to offer a full fraud chargeback guarantee.

Forter

Kount’s patented machine learning technology analyzes transactions to stop fraud and increase revenue for online businesses, merchants, acquiring banks, and payment service providers.

ThreatMetrix is a robust fraud prevention solution, enhancing fraud assessments through a vast database of malicious IP addresses and device fingerprints. Its easy integration and real-time analytics offer valuable insights, making it ideal for assessing transaction risks and maintaining device identity integrity.

ThreatMetrix provides a user-friendly interface for transaction analysis, featuring customizable rules and reports to monitor suspicious activities. Its device profiling and real-time analytics deliver comprehensive insights into login attempts and activities, contributing to effective fraud detection and risk management. Users benefit from simple integration and scalability, supported by dependable technical support and proactive updates. While effective, enhancements are needed in SDK integration complexity, real-time processing, and case management automation. An outdated interface, high pricing, limited data storage, and the need for better data field collaboration also present challenges. More intuitive rule engines and comprehensive threat detection features would improve the user experience.

What are ThreatMetrix's most important features?

Vast Database: Provides accurate fraud assessments using malicious IP addresses and device fingerprints.
Customizable Rules: Offers adaptable transaction analysis with diverse reporting capabilities.
Device Profiling: Maintains integrity through detailed device intelligence.
Real-Time Analytics: Delivers insights into login attempts and user activities.
Scalability and Integration: Facilitates easy system integration for varied business needs.

What benefits or ROI should users expect?

Accurate Fraud Detection: Through comprehensive data analysis.
Risk Mitigation: Offers insights for effective prevention strategies.
Enhanced Security: Identifies unauthorized access and potential threats.
Simple Integration: Seamless implementation in existing systems.
Reliability: Users gain consistent support and updates.

ThreatMetrix is implemented across industries like retail, banking, and digital services for fraud detection, device intelligence, and maintaining device identity integrity. Organizations employ it to detect unauthorized mobile access, identify credit card fraud, and prevent identity theft. Integrated through an SDK with backend API management, it enables device checks, transaction risk assessment, and access control management.

Sample Customers

Kiwi.com, Fiverr, James Allen

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.

Trip Advisor, Stone Hub, TD Bank, Rabobank, GoPro