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

Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs ThreatMetrix comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 12, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Nice Actimize Fraud & Authe...
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
ThreatMetrix
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is 6.4%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 12.9%, up from 12.9% 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.
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

"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."
"It's a very good case management system."
"The tool helped my clients track some fraudulent activities which couldn’t have been possible without the solution. Once the solution is deployed, the system of the client needs to be upgraded and overhauled to reflect the new system. The end users can see the benefits of it. The integration of the solution is increasing the customer base of our clients since more customers from other banks have decided to join the client bank due to the level of security."
"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 core engine seems to be better than the rest for pattern recognition. It is able to process large amounts of data."
"The solution user-friendly interactive, informative and it is also very light."
"The case management tool is user friendly."
"The process and technology in the solution are very fast, and it is bug-free."
"The solution is stable."
"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 can be easily integrated with applications."
"It is a stable solution."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"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."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"There is excellent documentation available."
 

Cons

"Could include additional customization"
"I would say — Actimize is not being moved forward by Nice."
"The solution needs to mitigate and provide an update for one listener process that keeps failing."
"Processes don't function when front end is down."
"The patch section has room for improvement."
"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."
"Licensing costs are high compared to other products in the market."
"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."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
"The tool is very expensive."
"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"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."
"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."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"It is reasonable for enterprise customers."
"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 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.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
44%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Wholesaler/Distributor
4%
Financial Services Firm
54%
Computer Software Company
9%
Retailer
5%
Insurance Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Also Known As

Actimize, NICE Actimize
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Associated Banc-Corp
Trip Advisor, Stone Hub, TD Bank, Rabobank, GoPro
Find out what your peers are saying about Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management vs. ThreatMetrix and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.