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 April 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is 6.3%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 13.7%, up from 12.7% 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 solution is easier to set up, configure, and use than other products."
"Nice's most valuable feature would be its rule engine."
"The core engine seems to be better than the rest for pattern recognition. It is able to process large amounts of data."
"The most valuable feature is automation which makes our transaction capture 40 percent easier."
"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 case management tool is user friendly."
"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 product for compliance and transaction monitoring for anti-money laundering."
"It is a stable solution."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"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 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 is stable."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"There is excellent documentation available."
"The solution can be easily integrated with applications."
 

Cons

"This solution is unnecessarily complex."
"Sometimes when we move from one version to another, a few things don't work as expected."
"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."
"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."
"Its user interface could be better."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
"The tool is very expensive."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"It would be useful if they could offer real-time processing."
"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."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"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."
"I don't like the length of our vendor contracts because it kills our flexibility."
"Nice Actimize Fraud & Authentication Management is an expensive product."
"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.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
42%
Computer Software Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Energy/Utilities Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
53%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
5%
Retailer
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: March 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.