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

Riskified vs SHIELD 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

Riskified
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
9th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
SHIELD
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
12th
Average Rating
3.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of Riskified is 4.6%, up from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SHIELD is 1.5%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fraud Detection and Prevention Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Riskified4.6%
SHIELD1.5%
Other93.9%
Fraud Detection and Prevention
 

Featured Reviews

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…
reviewer2561490 - PeerSpot reviewer
Effective fraud prevention but expensive
We are using SHIELD as the end user for our gaming platform to prevent fraud with our gamers Earlier, there were multiple instances of security issues, like fraud where users were playing with each other and using multiple accounts to redeem cashbacks. Fraud prevention has helped us reduce these…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"We find the device fingerprinting feature valuable."
 

Cons

"The fraud channel is a sensitive spot, so it's always complex."
"I can't think of any issues that we've faced that need to be improved."
"The user interface could be more intuitive."
"It is a costly solution since they charge based on MAU."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It is determined by the requirements of each company."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions are best for your needs.
867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Retailer
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
University
6%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Healthcare Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for SHIELD?
The solution is too expensive. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate it nine or ten in terms of cost.
What needs improvement with SHIELD?
It is a costly solution since they charge based on MAU. We want to optimize the cost for our platform, and the high cost is the only problem we have with SHIELD.
What is your primary use case for SHIELD?
We are using SHIELD as the end user for our gaming platform to prevent fraud with our gamers.
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

ALDO, Macy's, Finish Line, Burlington, Burton Group, Sky-tours, GiftCards.com, Kirna Zabête
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatMetrix, NICE, FICO and others in Fraud Detection and Prevention. Updated: August 2025.
867,445 professionals have used our research since 2012.