.jpg)
1 hour ago
2
Article content
RESTON, Va., March 31, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — The identity threat landscape is no longer aligned with the metrics used to measure fraud prevention. As fraud becomes more complex, adaptive, and often built and validated across multiple systems over time, traditional KPIs — including fraud losses, chargebacks, and detection rates — reflect past outcomes rather than emerging risk. According to a recent survey by Regula, a global developer of identity verification solutions and forensic devices, businesses are beginning to recognize this gap.
THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
- Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman, and others.
- Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.
- Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.
- National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
- Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.
SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada.
- Exclusive articles from Barbara Shecter, Joe O'Connor, Gabriel Friedman and others.
- Daily content from Financial Times, the world's leading global business publication.
- Unlimited online access to read articles from Financial Post, National Post and 15 news sites across Canada with one account.
- National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on.
- Daily puzzles, including the New York Times Crossword.
REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
- Access articles from across Canada with one account.
- Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments.
- Enjoy additional articles per month.
- Get email updates from your favourite authors.
THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK.
Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.
- Access articles from across Canada with one account
- Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments
- Enjoy additional articles per month
- Get email updates from your favourite authors
Sign In or Create an Account
or
Article content
Article content
As a result, organizations risk making decisions based on incomplete visibility, with implications for fraud losses, compliance exposure, and operational efficiency.
Article content
Article content
By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.
Article content
The research, conducted among fraud prevention and financial crime professionals across the United States, Germany, the UAE, and Singapore, shows that this shift is already underway, with organizations rethinking how they evaluate identity verification performance.
Article content
Current vs. Desired Fraud Measurement Metrics – Top 5
Article content
| Category | Metric | Nature of Metric | What It Measures |
| Current KPIs | Chargeback rate | Reactive | Captures financial harm already incurred |
| Customer impact | Reactive | Measures scope of fallout once fraud hits customers | |
| Cost of fraud | Reactive/Strategic | Broad loss measure used in budget arguments | |
| Employee training effectiveness | Diagnostic | Tests internal readiness, not fraud outcomes | |
| False negatives/illegitimate users accepted | Diagnostic | Highlights system blind spots, informs model tuning | |
| Desired Metrics | Compliance with regulatory standards | Compliance-driven | Keeps firms aligned with tightening laws, preventing penalties and legal consequences |
| Collaboration with external fraud intelligence sources | Proactive | Builds early warning via shared threat data | |
| Fraud prevention ROI | Strategic | Proves investment value, wins budgets | |
| Customer satisfaction | Strategic | Finds the balance between stopping fraud and maintaining a smooth customer experience | |
| Response time & fraud trend detection speed | Proactive | Measures agility in catching new schemes |
Article content
Article content
A growing gap between reactive metrics and future needs
Article content
Most organizations still rely on outcome-based KPIs such as chargeback rates, cost of fraud, and false negative rates. These metrics reflect what has already happened.
Article content
However, companies are increasingly prioritizing forward-looking indicators — including compliance with pressing regulations, collaboration with external fraud intelligence sources, and fraud prevention ROI. Each reflects a specific pressure point. Regulatory compliance has become more critical as enforcement intensifies and penalties rise. External intelligence is gaining importance because fraud now spans multiple platforms and cannot be fully detected within a single system. And ROI is moving to the forefront as organizations are required to justify fraud prevention investments not only in terms of risk reduction, but also in business impact.
Article content
This creates a growing gap between reactive measurement and the need for real-time fraud visibility.
Article content
From single metrics to KPI systems
Article content
Regula’s survey shows that IDV performance is no longer measured by a single indicator.
English (US)