We performed a comparison between Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management and ThreatMetrix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The core engine seems to be better than the rest for pattern recognition. It is able to process large amounts of data."
"It's a very good product for compliance and transaction monitoring for anti-money laundering."
"The solution loads big data efficiently and quickly."
"The most valuable feature is automation which makes our transaction capture 40 percent easier."
"The most valuable feature is the designer, which allows us to connect to UI and build things directly, such as creating a platform with our synchronizing policy manager rules, without any additional requirements."
"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 process and technology in the solution are very fast, and it is bug-free."
"The solution user-friendly interactive, informative and it is also very light."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"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 user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"There is excellent documentation available."
"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."
"Its user interface could be better."
"Sometimes when we move from one version to another, a few things don't work as expected."
"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."
"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."
"Could include additional customization"
"The solution needs to mitigate and provide an update for one listener process that keeps failing."
"The patch section has room for improvement."
"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."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
"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."
"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."
More Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is ranked 1st in Fraud Detection and Prevention with 17 reviews while ThreatMetrix is ranked 2nd in Fraud Detection and Prevention with 7 reviews. Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is rated 8.2, while ThreatMetrix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management writes "Highly intelligent and effective for detecting fraud in transactions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThreatMetrix writes "Stable with a good interface and offers excellent event reports". Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is most compared with BAE Systems NetReveal, FICO Falcon Platform, IBM Safer Payments, Featurespace ARIC Fraud Hub and Guardian Analytics Fraud Detection, whereas ThreatMetrix is most compared with BioCatch, FICO Falcon Platform, Featurespace ARIC Fraud Hub, iovation FraudForce and RSA Adaptive Authentication. See our Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs. ThreatMetrix 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.
