"The core engine seems to be better than the rest for pattern recognition. It is able to process large amounts of data."
"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 case management tool is user friendly."
"The solution loads big data efficiently and quickly."
"It's a very good product for compliance and transaction monitoring for anti-money laundering."
"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 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."
"I would say — Actimize is not being moved forward by Nice."
"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."
"It has become too complex for its own good with a lot of versions. They are trying to do too much. Instead of keeping it sort of traditional and keeping the core search engine as a standalone and having analytical bolt-ons, they have decided to jam it all into the same product, which made the product overly complex and difficult to implement."
"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."
"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."
"Processes don't function when front end is down."
"Could include additional customization"
"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."
"Occasionally, there are some mechanisms that can work a bit slow."
More Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is ranked 1st in Fraud Detection and Prevention with 10 reviews while SAS Fraud Management is ranked 7th in Fraud Detection and Prevention with 2 reviews. Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is rated 7.8, while SAS Fraud Management is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management writes "Offers robotics, machine learning, and enables us to reduce analysts ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SAS Fraud Management writes "Monitor multiple channels with a single platform". Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is most compared with Featurespace ARIC Fraud Hub, BAE Systems NetReveal, FICO Falcon Platform, ThreatMetrix and Broadcom Payment Security, whereas SAS Fraud Management is most compared with IBM Safer Payments, FICO Falcon Platform and IBM Financial Crimes Insights (FCI). See our Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs. SAS Fraud Management report.
See our list of best Fraud Detection and Prevention vendors.
We monitor all Fraud Detection and Prevention reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
