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

IBM Safer Payments vs Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management 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 July 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of IBM Safer Payments is 3.3%, down from 5.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is 6.3%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 12.3%, down from 13.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fraud Detection and Prevention
 

Featured Reviews

Yurii Fedets - PeerSpot reviewer
Helps determine whether a transaction is correct or fraudulent
It's a very fast solution. It can make decisions in 10, 20 or 30 milliseconds. Another feature is that it's a white-box solution. Our clients can see the system's operation, including the rules influencing each decision. Additionally, it's an omnichannel solution capable of utilizing information from various digital channels such as card processing, mobile banking, web banking, APMs, and others. This allows for transaction analysis. Moreover, it's a highly adaptable solution that can integrate machine learning, both external and internal models, making it easy to implement. Compared to competitors, it's one of the easiest solutions to implement. The tool allows historical data to be leveraged within the system to train models without needing external systems. Secondly, it supports external modeling systems, enabling customers to create and train models outside the product and then integrate them into the system. This is useful for customers who utilize other machine learning and artificial intelligence systems alongside IBM Safer Payments.
Jahnavi Koppala - PeerSpot reviewer
A good designer for the UI, stable, and scalable
I give the solution a ten out of ten. Unlike other technologies, Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is partially pre-built, making it easy to understand what needs to be done and how to complete the work. Furthermore, due to the pre-existing code, there is no need to start from scratch, providing a better understanding of the current situation and what needs to be implemented. Our organization moved to Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management because the solution is an upgraded version and also it provides many benefits as we can easily activate rules. Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is very convenient and it provides easy access to everything. When utilizing the solution for the first time, always start with a lower environment such as a development environment. Only use Dell and SIT, and do not go directly to production. The solution may have an impact on the bank and large transactions.
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

"This feature has influenced my decision-making processes because IBM is a big player in this market, and we were looking for someone who could handle the number of transactions that we have, support us, and also had a local presence in the market."
"It's a very fast solution. It can make decisions in 10, 20 or 30 milliseconds. Another feature is that it's a white-box solution. Our clients can see the system's operation, including the rules influencing each decision. Additionally, it's an omnichannel solution capable of utilizing information from various digital channels such as card processing, mobile banking, web banking, APMs, and others."
"The most valuable feature is automation which makes our transaction capture 40 percent easier."
"The process and technology in the solution are very fast, and it is bug-free."
"The core engine seems to be better than the rest for pattern recognition. It is able to process large amounts of data."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"Nice's most valuable feature would be its rule engine."
"They have a very expansive transaction monitoring fleet. They have a lot of models and rules to choose from. Its flexibility or ability to customize a model is very impressive as compared to other platforms."
"The solution user-friendly interactive, informative and it is also very light."
"The solution is easier to set up, configure, and use than other products."
"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."
"There is excellent documentation available."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"The solution can be easily integrated with applications."
"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 solution is stable."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
 

Cons

"The tool should enhance its reporting interface by adding more graphical elements like charts, diagrams, etc. Customers now want more vibrant visuals—bright charts with larger tables, perhaps incorporating animations and 3D elements. Sometimes, it's challenging to explain to customers why the current solution, while good, lacks these kinds of visuals."
"My experience with the initial setup of IBM Safer Payments was complex. It was complex because without pre-built-in templates, you need to build integration with different systems."
"It is complex in terms of daily maintenance. Other detection platforms run on a 15-day or one-month window, whereas this particular platform runs daily. Therefore, it requires daily maintenance. If there is a delay due to this daily maintenance, it creates a snowball effect impacting the subsequent days. It takes a lot of effort to catch up and get into BAU mode. It would be great if they could include certain features to make the daily processing less complex, but I don't see that happening. It is a complex product, and with each version release, it is just becoming more and more complex."
"Processes don't function when front end is down."
"I would like for it to proactively give suggestions or hints before initiating the transaction. It could make use of the data that has already occurred, like machine learning. It should learn patterns from specific countries."
"This solution is unnecessarily complex."
"Sometimes when we move from one version to another, a few things don't work as expected."
"Licensing costs are high compared to other products in the market."
"Its user interface could be better."
"It would be better if it integrated with other tools. Actimize uses many databases, and everything on Actimize has been deployed to the database. On the customer side, on the front end side, if they focus more on integrating with other applications, it can make the tool better. The reporting feature and dashboards could be better. In the next release, I would like them to incorporate a Tableau-type reporting structure within this tool."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"The tool is very expensive."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"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."
"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."
"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"We need a separate license for each of the packages, such as the core package, self-development package, and customization package."
"I don't know how licensing is handled in the current organization. I know that Actimize provides an option for yearly licensing because that's what we had in my previous job."
"Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is an expensive product."
"It is reasonable for enterprise customers."
"I don't like the length of our vendor contracts because it kills our flexibility."
"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.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
48%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
6%
University
4%
Financial Services Firm
43%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Insurance Company
3%
Financial Services Firm
51%
Computer Software Company
10%
Insurance Company
5%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Safer Payments?
I haven't looked at IBM Safer Payments in that detail, so I wouldn't be able to answer what areas need to be improved...
What is your primary use case for IBM Safer Payments?
My usual use cases for IBM Safer Payments involved real-time fraud monitoring of near real-time, not real-time, near ...
What is your primary use case for Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management?
I am working on Transaction Monitoring and Fraud Risk, and I have experience using the Nice Actimize Fraud & Auth...
What needs improvement with Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management?
We can definitely improve the Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management tool because I sometimes encounter ...
What advice do you have for others considering Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management?
I have rated Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management a seven out of ten. AI should be integrated into the...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Actimize, NICE Actimize
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Borgun
Associated Banc-Corp
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: June 2025.
861,803 professionals have used our research since 2012.