Research shows that manual review is the largest expense eating at fraud budgets

According to CyberSource’s 2016 Fraud Benchmark report, companies allot most of their fraud funds to the manual review process. Of those manually reviewed, 82% transactions are approved. Because of the high acceptance rate of manually reviewed orders, companies are tightening their screening process to decrease that number in hopes of cutting costs and accepting more legitimate orders in real-time. The report also states that many businesses don’t ship to other countries outside of the U.S. because of the risk involved. But for companies that do expand across the borders, they spend just as much time – if not more – inspecting each order. Certain countries are infamously known for facilitating fraudulent activity, so merchants are rightfully extra careful when accepting these orders. However, the extra caution devoted to scrutinizing each transaction can lead to a higher false positive rate, indirectly affecting profits and budget.

It’s obvious that the relationship between expansion and manual review is positive. With every new channel comes new rules that need to be evaluated and integrated. It’s all about balance. If the rules are set too strict, then there will be a higher false positive rate. If the rules are too lax, then that may increase the fraud rate significantly. Many solutions offer the tools to set your own rules, leaving the real work to be done in-house. That requires hiring a whole team of fraud specialists in order to have the tools run effectively.

At NoFraud, we believe that using a solution with a expert fraud prevention algorithm that completely eliminates manual review is the most financially savvy choice. Time and money spent on managing fraud can be utilized in other areas of your business.

Click here to learn more.