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

Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs Riskified 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 Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is 6.3%, up from 5.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Riskified is 5.0%, up from 4.4% 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

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.
JJ
Integrates well, reasonably priced, and the technical support is helpful
The most valuable features of this solution are the scoring and the yes, or no function. I am satisfied with the documentation it provides. It integrates well with other products The user interface could be more intuitive. I have been familiar with Riskified for three years. Riskified is a…
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

"Nice's most valuable feature would be its rule engine."
"It's a very good case management system."
"It's a very good product for compliance and transaction monitoring for anti-money laundering."
"I like the score generated on the Actimize platform for each customer transaction. Those are transactions per second, accommodating millions of transactions per second. That's the best feature of Actimize."
"The solution loads big data efficiently and quickly."
"I like the tracking methodology. Though it was implemented on-premises, the compliance is compatible with it. It will have certain modifications with RPM and APR. It has good exposure from a compliance point of view."
"The alerts are the most valuable feature because we have different alerts. Different data is fed to Actimize. It alerts us if a transaction happened from a certain place."
"The most valuable feature is automation which makes our transaction capture 40 percent easier."
"The scoring mechanism is good."
"Our clients have definitely avoided losing money on multiple occasions due to fraud."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the scoring and the yes, or no function."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"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."
"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."
"It is a stable solution."
"The solution is stable."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
 

Cons

"Processes don't function when front end is down."
"One of the problems that our clients generally talk about is the price of the product when they have to purchase the product and the licenses for it. Those are on the higher side."
"I would say — Actimize is not being moved forward by Nice."
"From the front end side, the UI is definitely user-friendly. It is highly compatible as long as the reading is at the coding point of view. But it can't provide certain high coding. When a person clicks on any kind of scenario or alert, I would like to have a metadata help menu."
"Could include additional customization"
"Its user interface could be better."
"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."
"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."
"I can't think of any issues that we've faced that need to be improved."
"The fraud channel is a sensitive spot, so it's always complex."
"The user interface could be more intuitive."
"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."
"The tool is very expensive."
"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."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is an expensive product."
"I don't like the length of our vendor contracts because it kills our flexibility."
"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."
"It is reasonable for enterprise customers."
"We need a separate license for each of the packages, such as the core package, self-development package, and customization package."
"It is determined by the requirements of each company."
"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
43%
Computer Software Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Insurance Company
3%
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
14%
Retailer
10%
Manufacturing Company
6%
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 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...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Actimize, NICE Actimize
No data available
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Associated Banc-Corp
ALDO, Macy's, Finish Line, Burlington, Burton Group, Sky-tours, GiftCards.com, Kirna Zabête
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.