3 ms·
It's pretty insane. Empirically, you'd rather let several fraudsters through in order to not trap a good customer (because of their customer lifetime value, br
by rbres 9y ago
It's pretty insane.
Empirically, you'd rather let several fraudsters through in order to not trap a good customer (because of their customer lifetime value, brand value, etc).
However, the industry does the opposite. They'll reject 3 good customers to catch 1 fraudster. It's really bad.
Every switch to Bolt has seen a 1%-20% lift in order approval rates (while guaranteeing zero fraud) because of our unique data engine and data visibility. Huge reason why companies are switching to Bolt.
- jrochkind1 9y agoSo you're saying despite having better fraud detection, your false positive rates (orders that would have been non-fraudulent but rejected anyway) are _also_ lower than the competition? This is definitely something you might want to put in your marketting, but also back up in some way. As a general rule, I'm going to assume any reduction in false negatives has some increase in false positives. If the general rule is not true in your case, I'm going to need to be convinced. :)
- rbres 9y agoHere are some case studies to prove it: https://bolt.com/case-studies https://bolt.com/case-studies Many of our clients switched from top-tier fraud detection providers and saw significant lift in order approvals with Bolt. More case studies on the way.