Skip to main content

Fraud Prevention Vendors

This page covers card-not-present (CNP) and online fraud tools only. Point-of-sale fraud (EMV terminals, P2PE, physical card security) is a completely different stack and is not covered here. If you are looking for POS security, this is not your page.

Find Your Row, Ignore the Rest​

VolumeWhat to DoWhat to Ignore
Under $100K/yearProcessor tools only. If fraud is painful at this volume, you probably have a product or customer acquisition problem, not a fraud tool problem.Everything else on this page
$100K-$1M/yearStill processor tools. Add Plaid-type verification only if ACH returns are your specific pain point.Full-stack platforms, orchestration layers
$1M-$10M/yearEvaluate ONE dedicated platform. Test in shadow mode before committing.Orchestration layers, enterprise tools
Over $10M/yearLayer deliberately. Consider orchestration. Hire someone full-time for this.Nothing, but do not buy everything at once

The uncomfortable truth: if fraud is killing you under $1M, you probably have a product, pricing, or customer acquisition problem. Fraud tools will not fix that.

Processor-Native Tools​

When This Matters​

When you need fraud protection but do not have time or budget for a separate vendor relationship.

Who Should Use This​

Everyone under $1M in volume. Anyone who values simplicity over customization. Merchants already integrated with these processors who want to minimize vendor sprawl.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
Stripe RadarYou are already on Stripe and want one-click fraud protection. Decent ML, good defaults for most e-commerce.Only works on Stripe. Limited customization. If you leave Stripe, you start over.
Adyen RiskYou are on Adyen and want integrated protection. Strong in enterprise and international.Adyen-only. Less transparent than standalone tools.
Braintree / PayPalYou are on Braintree or want PayPal buyer protection dynamics.PayPal ecosystem lock-in. Less configurable than Stripe Radar.
Shopify Fraud AnalysisYou are on Shopify and want zero additional integration. Basic but functional for small stores.Very basic. Shopify-only. Not suitable above $500K unless supplemented.
Experiment to Run

Before evaluating external tools, check what your processor already offers. Schedule a 30-minute call with your Stripe, Adyen, or processor account rep. Ask: what fraud tools are included in my current plan? What would upgrading cost? Often the answer saves you six months of vendor evaluation.

If you are under $1M: Stop here. Use your processor's tools. Come back when you have a specific problem these tools cannot solve.

Full-Stack Fraud Platforms​

When This Matters​

When processor tools are not catching enough fraud, when you need more customization, or when you want a chargeback guarantee.

Who Should Use This​

Merchants above $1M in volume with a dedicated person touching fraud at least a few hours a week. Companies with enough transaction volume to make the per-transaction cost worthwhile.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
SardineYou need device fingerprinting, behavioral analytics, fraud rules, and compliance in one SDK. Best for fintech, crypto, BNPL, platforms that hold balances or issue cards.Overkill for simple DTC e-commerce under $1M. Fintech-native, less e-commerce playbook out of the box.
SignifydYou want a guarantee model where they reimburse fraud they approve. E-commerce focus, easy integration.They make money by being conservative. They will decline borderline transactions you might have approved. Calculate false positive cost before celebrating the guarantee.
ForterSimilar guarantee model to Signifyd. High automation, less manual review.Less customizable. Guarantee model means conservative decisions.
RiskifiedGuarantee model with strong e-commerce vertical expertise.Limited to certain verticals. Same guarantee tradeoff: they profit from declining edge cases.
SiftReal-time ML, strong account protection and ATO prevention. More customizable than guarantee vendors.Can be expensive at scale. No guarantee model means you own the losses.
Kount (Equifax)Configurable rules plus ML. Good for teams that want control over decisioning logic.Steeper learning curve. Requires more hands-on management than guarantee vendors.
Experiment to Run

Pull your last 90 days of chargebacks. Tag which ones your processor flags as high-risk today. Ask any vendor for a 30-day shadow mode pilot. Compare the vendor's "would-block" list against actual fraud and good customers. If their false positive rate is higher than your fraud savings, do not buy.

Guarantee model warning: Signifyd, Forter, and Riskified reimburse you for fraud they approve. Sounds great. But they make money by being conservative. They decline borderline transactions you might have approved. Before celebrating the guarantee, calculate: how much revenue am I losing to their false positives? A 0.5% fraud rate with 2% false positives might be worse than a 0.8% fraud rate with 0.3% false positives.

If you are under $1M: These platforms are probably overkill. Stay with processor tools until you have specific pain they cannot solve.

Identity Verification / KYC​

When This Matters​

When you need to verify that a person is who they claim to be. Account opening, high-value transactions, regulatory requirements, or after suspicious activity flags.

Who Should Use This​

Fintechs, marketplaces with seller onboarding, any business with KYC requirements, platforms where account-level fraud is a bigger problem than transaction-level fraud.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
SocureYou want ML-based identity verification without requiring document uploads for every user. Good for balancing friction vs. accuracy.Premium pricing. Works better with US data.
ProveYou want phone-centric identity verification. Strong carrier data signals.Phone-focused. Less comprehensive than document-based options.
JumioYou need global document verification with AI-powered extraction. Strong in regulated industries.Premium pricing. Can add friction to onboarding.
OnfidoStrong in fintech, good user experience for document capture.Regional coverage varies. Check your specific markets.
VeriffCompetitive pricing, video-based verification, strong in Europe.Newer player. Less US-centric than alternatives.
PersonaDeveloper-friendly, flexible workflows, good for custom verification flows.Newer, still building out some features.
Experiment to Run

Before buying IDV, measure your current abandonment rate at signup. Then run a 2-week test with the vendor on a segment. If abandonment increases more than fraud decreases, the friction is not worth it.

If you are under $1M and not in a regulated industry: You probably do not need dedicated IDV yet. Basic email and phone verification is enough.

Risk Orchestration Platforms​

When This Matters​

When you are using 3+ fraud signals from different sources and need to combine them into a single decision. When your fraud stack is complex enough that managing integrations is its own job.

Who Should Use This​

Companies above $10M with multiple fraud vendors already in place. Teams with dedicated fraud engineers. Organizations where fraud decisioning is a core competency, not an afterthought.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
AlloyYou need to orchestrate identity, fraud, and compliance signals into unified workflows. Strong in fintech onboarding.These are meta-tools and plumbing, not magic fraud brains. If you do not know what signals you need, orchestration will not help.
Unit21You want case management plus orchestration. Good for teams doing manual review at scale.Same caveat: orchestration without strategy is just expensive plumbing.

If your fraud stack fits on one whiteboard page with fewer than five boxes, you do not need orchestration yet.

Experiment to Run

Before buying orchestration, diagram your current fraud flow on a whiteboard. Count the integrations. If you have fewer than 5, orchestration is premature. If you have more than 5 and spend significant engineering time managing them, then evaluate.

If you are under $10M: Ignore this section entirely. You do not need orchestration. Focus on getting one or two tools working well.

Bank Account / ACH Verification​

When This Matters​

When you accept ACH payments and R01 (insufficient funds) or R10 (unauthorized) returns are eating your margin.

Who Should Use This​

Any business with meaningful ACH volume. Subscription businesses with recurring debits. Platforms that pay out to bank accounts (gig economy, marketplaces).

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
PlaidYou want the broadest bank coverage and the most features (Auth, Identity, Balance, Signal). Default choice for most.Some customers resist linking their bank. Pricing can add up at volume.
Stripe Financial ConnectionsYou are already on Stripe and want tight integration.Stripe-only. Less coverage than Plaid for some banks.
Finicity (Mastercard)You want an alternative to Plaid with enterprise features.Smaller network than Plaid.
MXStrong coverage in credit unions. Good if your customer base skews toward CUs.Less coverage in large banks than Plaid.
Experiment to Run

For 30 days, run balance checks only on first debits over $500. Compare R01 rates against a control segment with no checks. If the R01 reduction times your average recovery cost exceeds the verification cost, keep it. If not, raise your threshold or skip it.

If you are under $100K in ACH volume: Micro-deposits for new customers is enough. Do not buy verification tools yet.

Chargeback and Dispute Management​

When This Matters​

When dispute volume is overwhelming your team or you are creeping toward network thresholds.

If you are approaching 0.65% (Visa early warning) or 0.9% (Visa dispute program), see dispute monitoring thresholds before you go vendor shopping.

Who Should Use This​

Merchants with consistent chargeback volume who want to reduce disputes before they hit the network, or who need help with representment at scale.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
Ethoca (Mastercard)You want pre-dispute alerts. When a cardholder complains to their bank, you get notified before it becomes a chargeback. Refund quickly and it never hits your ratio.A refund costs you the sale. A dispute costs you the sale plus fees plus program risk. Alerts are a tax on bad customer experience, not a fix.
Verifi (Visa)Same pre-dispute alert concept, plus CE 3.0 integration for compelling evidence automation.Same tradeoff as Ethoca. Fix root causes, not just symptoms.
Chargebacks911Full-service dispute management. They handle representment for you. Often includes Ethoca and Verifi access bundled.You are outsourcing expertise you might want in-house.
MidigatorSimilar to Chargebacks911. Dispute management plus alert integration.Same consideration: are you building capability or outsourcing it?

Bundling note: Chargebacks911, Midigator, and similar vendors typically include Ethoca and Verifi access in their packages. Single integration, sometimes cheaper than going direct because of their volume pricing.

From the issuer side: A pre-dispute alert shows up as a customer complaint that has not become a chargeback yet. If you refund quickly, it never hits the network as a dispute. A refund costs you the sale. A dispute costs you the sale plus fees plus program risk. Alerts buy you the option to choose the cheaper loss.

Experiment to Run

Before buying alert services, pull your last 50 chargebacks. How many could you have refunded proactively if you had known 24 hours earlier? If the answer is less than half, alerts will not solve your problem. You have a root cause issue, not a notification issue.

Bot and Abuse Mitigation​

When This Matters​

When you are seeing automated attacks: card testing, credential stuffing, fake account creation, or promo abuse at scale.

Who Should Use This​

Platforms with public-facing signup or checkout flows that are being targeted by bots. E-commerce with frequent flash sales or limited inventory. Anyone seeing velocity patterns that look automated.

VendorGood fit if...Tradeoff
Arkose LabsYou want to make bot attacks economically unviable. Strong against credential stuffing and fake accounts.Adds friction. Not every business needs this level of protection.
DataDomeAlternative in bot mitigation. Real-time detection.Similar tradeoffs to Arkose.
HUMANAnother player in the bot detection space.Evaluate based on your specific attack patterns.
Experiment to Run

Before buying bot mitigation, check your server logs for the last 30 days. Calculate: what percentage of traffic is clearly automated? What is the actual cost of that bot traffic (failed auths, infrastructure, fraud)? If bot traffic is under 5% and cost is under $1K/month, basic rate limiting might be enough.

If you are not seeing obvious bot attacks: You probably do not need dedicated bot mitigation. Start with rate limiting and CAPTCHA.

Build vs. Buy​

If you are under $10M in annual volume, assume you are in "buy" mode by default. Building fraud models before you have stable data and enough fraud volume is usually an expensive hobby project.

When to Buy​

  • Speed to market matters more than customization
  • You do not have ML or data science resources
  • You want access to consortium data (vendors see fraud across many merchants)
  • Your fraud patterns are standard for your vertical

When to Build​

  • You have unique data the vendors cannot see
  • You have ML engineering resources with fraud domain knowledge
  • Your volume economics make per-transaction fees painful
  • You want to own the decisioning logic as a competitive advantage

Hybrid Approach (Most Common Above $10M)​

  • Buy: Device fingerprinting, identity verification, consortium signals
  • Build: Core decisioning logic, model tuning, custom rules
  • Integrate: Multiple vendor signals into your own scoring

What This Page Does Not Cover​

Card-present / POS fraud tools: EMV terminal security, P2PE encryption, and physical card fraud prevention are a different category with different vendors.

Issuer-side tools: FICO Falcon, Mastercard Decision Intelligence, Visa Advanced Authorization, and similar tools are for card issuers making authorization decisions, not merchants.

Pure AML / compliance tools: Transaction monitoring for money laundering, SAR filing, and sanctions screening are compliance tools, not fraud tools. There is overlap (Sardine, Alloy), but dedicated AML platforms are out of scope here.

Before You Buy Anything​

  • Categorize your fraud. Pull 100 chargebacks and tag them: true fraud, friendly fraud, service issues. If most are friendly fraud, you have a customer experience problem, not a fraud tool problem.
  • Calculate your real fraud cost. Include disputes, fees, operations time, and false positives. A tool that "catches 20% more fraud" but blocks 2% of good customers might cost you money.
  • Run shadow mode. Any vendor worth buying will let you test without going live. If they will not, walk away.
  • Set kill criteria before you start. Decide what a "bad outcome" looks like before you see results. Otherwise you will rationalize whatever happens.
  • Talk to your processor first. A 30-minute call with Stripe, Adyen, or your acquirer might save you six months of vendor evaluation. Ask what is already included in your plan.