What is our primary use case?
We use Oracle FCCM to detect suspicious activities. We'll process the data for transaction monitoring and risk creation through an engine. It depends on the threshold and different criteria like the customer, date of birth, documentation, address, and country.
We look at how many transactions the customer wires, MI-tags, different transactions, and how they performed. Based on that, an alert is triggered, and the business will use the UI to investigate it. They will take it to the next level. If STR reporting is required, they'll submit it to the government. It's a regulatory project.
How has it helped my organization?
It's for the regulatory commission. It helps banks detect fraud or suspicious activities.
What is most valuable?
The transaction monitoring feature is valuable. The detection engine is also a very good feature. I know the rules, configuration, and how it scans the data. It's very good. They designed it to be very flexible. The deployment, implementation, data analysis, and reporting are all very efficient and flexible.
What needs improvement?
Oracle can improve the performance of the product. The UI's performance is very slow, and the processing time is very high when handling a huge amount of data. Error handling is also slow, and they have to improve it. It doesn't give you proper errors, and it takes a lot of time to investigate it. For developers, they should also improve their support.
For how long have I used the solution?
I've been working with Oracle for the last eight years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
It's a very strong one in terms of stability, and I recommend it.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
How are customer service and technical support?
Technical support is very good.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Oracle technical support a nine.
Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?
I use three products, Actimize, Oracle FCCM, and a BAE Detica System called Norkom. Oracle is the best. Actimize has a very flexible UI, and it's a performance coder. Oracle's performance isn't good, and it's very slow. They have issues. They have to optimize it. BAE Detica System is also not that great in terms of the UI.
Oracle's engine is excellent and very powerful. The processing engine is good, like the one at BAE Detica Systems. Actimize doesn't do error handling very well, and it will be difficult for the developers to support it every day. Otherwise, to implement and deploy, NICE Actimize has many automatic solutions that are better. Oracle has many manual deployments and implementations, and it's the same with Detica Systems.
How was the initial setup?
The initial setup is straightforward and isn't complex. But it really depends on the bank requirement rules and customization. That's the complex part. Otherwise, the base installation is very straightforward.
The deployment takes about six months, but customization could take years to deploy based on the project's size. The bank will have a massive trove of data, and you have to support that.
What was our ROI?
The banks are engaging in regulatory reporting from time to time, and they will save money that would otherwise be spent on fines.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
I think Oracle is very expensive. On the other hand, NICE Actimize has a very good price.
What other advice do I have?
I would advise potential customers to use NICE Actimize for risk rating and Oracle Mantas for transaction monitoring.
The biggest lesson I've learned from using Oracle FCCM is optimization, performance troubleshooting, and optimization for the SQL query.
On a scale from one to ten, I would give Oracle FCCM an eight.
