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

IBM Safer Payments vs ThreatMetrix 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

IBM Safer Payments
Ranking in Fraud Detection and Prevention
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
2
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 December 2025, in the Fraud Detection and Prevention category, the mindshare of IBM Safer Payments is 2.8%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of ThreatMetrix is 8.4%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Fraud Detection and Prevention Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
ThreatMetrix8.4%
IBM Safer Payments2.8%
Other88.8%
Fraud Detection and Prevention
 

Featured Reviews

TA
Business Technology Services at Habib Bank Ltd.
Real-time fraud prevention empowers effective decision-making
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.
Sohom Roy - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director at CSS Corp
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

"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."
"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."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution can be easily integrated with applications."
"The user interface, the portal, is very helpful in describing what attributes of concern are associated with the device."
"It is a stable solution."
"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."
"Accessible custom rules with a monthly update on performance."
"There is excellent documentation available."
"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."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"The interface does look a bit outdated."
"Could be more intuitive and user friendly."
"The tool is very expensive."
"We encountered a few issues with API calls to the solution."
"We are only using one feature. We haven't found the other features to be very good or very powerful."
"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

"I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten."
"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.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
44%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Media Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
45%
Computer Software Company
10%
Retailer
5%
Manufacturing Company
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Safer Payments?
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 S...
What is your primary use case for IBM Safer Payments?
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 inte...
What is your primary use case for ThreatMetrix?
The tool is integrated with the other solutions. It can be used to gauge threats and risks in the traffic, applications, network authenticity, and authenticity of people logging into an application...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Borgun
Trip Advisor, Stone Hub, TD Bank, Rabobank, GoPro
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Safer Payments vs. ThreatMetrix and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
879,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.