IBM Safer Payments Reviews

My usual use cases for IBM Safer Payments involved real-time fraud monitoring of near real-time, not real-time, near real-time fraud monitoring on debit and credit cards, as well as mobile and internet usage.

The features of IBM Safer Payments that I found most valuable are the "what if" scenarios. I find "what if" scenarios very valuable for my use cases because it's easier to simulate the rules that one would want to set up and see what the outcome would be beforehand; it doesn't take too much rework or effort.

I have used the transaction scoring feature of IBM Safer Payments. IBM Safer Payments adaptive machine learning models are still under review for improving the accuracy of fraud detection over time; it's not yet been fully realized because the more data you have, the better it is. Currently, the data is being populated, and it's too early to make definitive conclusions.

The ability to process large volumes of transactions in real-time for my organization is very important; that will become even more important once we are doing real-time monitoring and scoring.

I have benefited from the comprehensive reporting and visualization tools offered by IBM Safer Payments; they are lovely. These tools have assisted in optimizing my fraud prevention strategies because we are still building on a few things, but once you have a 360 view of the customer's transactional history, it's easier to build in rules for flagging anything that comes out of the ordinary, whether it's in terms of the number of transactions, the volume of the transactions, the location of the transactions, or all of them together. It brings in a lot of visibility into the transactional history and patterns for each customer.

I haven't looked at IBM Safer Payments in that detail, so I wouldn't be able to answer what areas need to be improved or enhanced.

I would suggest improving the integration because given that IBM Safer Payments is a world-class platform, it should have built-in templates and data elements which can be used. The baseline of the majority of the transactions that people use are debit, credit, and e-commerce transactions, and if these are already pre-defined then the implementation cycle will become faster.

I have been working with IBM Safer Payments for approximately two years in my previous organization.

My impression of the stability of IBM Safer Payments is that it's fairly stable; we haven't had any major issues.

IBM Safer Payments is fairly scalable. It's a matter of putting in more resources depending on how many transactions you are processing or integrations you have, and that's a fairly straightforward mechanism.

I have communicated with the technical support for IBM Safer Payments; that's an ongoing process. There haven't been any major issues, though there is always some communication in any application. I would rate the technical support of IBM Safer Payments an eight on a scale from 1 to 10.

Positive

Before IBM Safer Payments, I did not use a centralized solution; we had different systems for the cards and used the card scheme fraud management systems.

My experience with the initial setup of IBM Safer Payments was complex. It was complex because without pre-built-in templates, you need to build integration with different systems. It always becomes a case of who takes the lead; as a fraud management system, they should have the lead and say, "These are the overall templates for integration." We can then amend these to your requirements, whether data should be mandatory or not. If you leave it open, then every time there will be a debate and discussion on what data elements have to be included for fraud management, making it more complex in terms of setup.

We haven't seen any return on investment with this tool yet because this was more regulatory, but I think in the next year or so, we'll probably be looking at that and seeing how much it has benefited us.

We did evaluate a few other options before choosing IBM Safer Payments. It's been some time since I looked into it, so I don't have that data right now to share what those options were and why we decided to go with IBM Safer Payments.

This feature has influenced my decision-making processes because IBM is a big player in this market, and we were looking for someone who could handle the number of transactions that we have, support us, and also had a local presence in the market. Any solution will have some problems, and you would need some support. Due to government regulations, we cannot have this on the cloud, so it has to be an on-prem solution.

I assess the impact of IBM Safer Payments on maintaining compliance with regulatory standards within my organization as very high; it's a very good tool to have—not just good but a must-have.

Fraud prevention is one thing, but compliance with regulatory regulations within each country is another. We do have different countries involved, so if it is compliant to each and every one, then we do not have to go into changes, development, or customization. That becomes very important for regulatory compliance.

My experience with the pricing and licensing of IBM Safer Payments is that it's a bit on the higher side, and the tiering is not very clear as to how many transactions; the tier-based pricing needs to be more transparent.

Overall, I rate IBM Safer Payments an 8 out of 10.

Our customers use this solution to check financial transactions for their payments. Our customers, mainly banks, use this solution to verify the accuracy of their clients' financial transactions. The solution helps determine whether a transaction is correct or fraudulent. If a transaction is deemed fraudulent, the system stops it, allowing the customer to decide the next steps. This solution acts to increase the security of financial payments and reduce fraud.

It's a very fast solution. It can make decisions in 10, 20 or 30 milliseconds. Another feature is that it's a white-box solution. Our clients can see the system's operation, including the rules influencing each decision. Additionally, it's an omnichannel solution capable of utilizing information from various digital channels such as card processing, mobile banking, web banking, APMs, and others.

This allows for transaction analysis. Moreover, it's a highly adaptable solution that can integrate machine learning, both external and internal models, making it easy to implement. Compared to competitors, it's one of the easiest solutions to implement.

The tool allows historical data to be leveraged within the system to train models without needing external systems. Secondly, it supports external modeling systems, enabling customers to create and train models outside the product and then integrate them into the system. This is useful for customers who utilize other machine learning and artificial intelligence systems alongside IBM Safer Payments.

The tool should enhance its reporting interface by adding more graphical elements like charts, diagrams, etc. Customers now want more vibrant visuals—bright charts with larger tables, perhaps incorporating animations and 3D elements. Sometimes, it's challenging to explain to customers why the current solution, while good, lacks these kinds of visuals.

I have been working with the product for four years. 

I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a six out of ten. 

The system was developed by a German company that IBM acquired ten years ago. The original German team within IBM's structure still provides technical support. They offer excellent 24/7 support, and in the four years we've worked with them, we've had no negative experiences.

I rate the solution's deployment ease as seven out of ten. Since it's an enterprise-level solution, its deployment can be completed in a few days. I don't know, for small companies, this solution is for big banks. There are specific requirements for such a solution. For example, it should be secure and reliable. That's why installing such a solution could take only a few minutes, like some applications on an iPhone, but a few days.

Regarding project implementation, this solution is like a tool to achieve specific results. Therefore, the full implementation of this project could take from six months to one year. The project includes several phases. First, there's the project design phase, which takes about one or two months to gather information from the customer and create documents describing their business processes and data flow. Next, we configure the solution to handle transactions from digital channels such as card processing, mobile banking, and web banking.

After that, we integrate the system with other bank systems to gather necessary information. Based on this information, we create models within the system to evaluate each transaction's legality. Finally, we set up integrations to relay decisions—for example, if the system identifies an illegal transaction, it sends this information to a CRM system or security officers.

The tool's quality justifies its pricing. 

I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten. 

If we evaluate IBM Safer Payments' integration capability on a scale from one to ten, it might score around five. While its integration capabilities are not poor, it's not a straightforward integration due to the complexity and the numerous inputs and outputs involved.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.