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

IBM Trusteer vs RSA Adaptive Authentication 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 Trusteer
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Fraud Detection and Prevention (11th)
RSA Adaptive Authentication
Average Rating
6.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (26th)
 

Mindshare comparison

IBM Trusteer and RSA Adaptive Authentication aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. IBM Trusteer is designed for Fraud Detection and Prevention and holds a mindshare of 3.4%, down 4.3% compared to last year.
RSA Adaptive Authentication, on the other hand, focuses on Authentication Systems, holds 0.5% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.
Fraud Detection and Prevention
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

PW
The features were pretty straightforward
I do not know why it was conflicting with my system. I sent a report to Trusteer hoping they could solve the issue and I get my system back as soon as possible without any more conflicts after the Windows updates. It seems to me if It conflicts with Windows that they should deactivate the issues or (even worse) delete them at our expense. I would like them to make it as user-friendly as possible. Simplicity is what we need. Load and go. Also, a help button that we hopefully never use would be nice.
AR
It stops fraud in banks and reduces their costs
RSA Adaptive Authentication is one of the most used tools for stopping fraud in the world. The tool is very good variable to take into account when deciding what product to choose. I think RSA is best options in this field since the tool is a really good piece of engineering.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The features were pretty straightforward. I just used them as I went along with very little interference all the years that I have used it."
"The most valuable feature is the stock tokens. That works the best for us."
"The capability to manage your business policy related to security when required without vendor involvement."
"Ingestion of logs and raising alert space on those logs are the most valuable features."
"Our customer are seeing value from the product, as they experience cost reductions. They can stop fraud from their customers, then their customers can have a better experience from their services."
"Risk Engine’s risk score, eFN, GeoIP, and device binding all coming together in the Policy Rules to decide when to escalate to MFA."
 

Cons

"After a Windows update, it started acting up. It blocked several programs. It became inactive after the Windows update and I had to remove Trusteer, allowing my computer to go back to its norm."
"I would like them to make it as user-friendly as possible. Simplicity is what we need. Load and go."
"Reporting modules is one of the major areas that can be improved further."
"Better filters when searching for events. The current features for current filters when searching fraud events are not very comprehensive. You can only filter by certain fields in the transaction."
"It has taken years to implement."
"The product is basically unusable. We need better ease of use; it's overly complicated."
"RSA Adaptive Authentication lacks a mechanism to verify the identity of a new user in the Enrollment event workflow."
"I would like to see a more adaptive type of solution, something that we could use on our web pages..."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Customers need to deploy the solution in a very expensive infrastructure. RSA should should think about a less expensive infrastructure for customers because the solution costs around $100,000, and the infrastructure needed to support that solution may be even more expensive than that price."
"Keep the proxy service layer on premises. That consumes SaaS security services on the back-end."
"You may need to opt for second best if funding is low and the number of users is huge. However, the pricing is able to be negotiated if your user figures are huge."
"The pricing is $50 per head, yearly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Fraud Detection and Prevention solutions are best for your needs.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
43%
Computer Software Company
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
4%
Financial Services Firm
50%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Comms Service Provider
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Banco Satander
ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about ThreatMetrix, NICE, FICO and others in Fraud Detection and Prevention. Updated: April 2025.
849,210 professionals have used our research since 2012.