The problem with fraud detection

Your fraud team caught the pattern yesterday. The money left last week.

When batch systems update hourly and fraudsters move in milliseconds, you're not detecting fraud — you're documenting losses.

If this sounds familiar, keep reading.
live

Fraud activity

Transactions0
Losses$0
hourly batch

What the model sees

Flagged0
StatusWaiting...

The Shift

The Old Era

Humans review flagged transactions. Batch pipelines run overnight. Rules update weekly. Fraud teams accept some loss as cost of doing business. The gap between fraud and detection is measured in hours.

The New Era

Fraudsters move in milliseconds. Coordinated rings. Synthetic identities. Card testing at scale. By the time your batch job runs, the money is gone and they've moved on.

The Hidden Problem

"Real-time" stacks are brittle

Most teams believe they've solved fraud latency. Kafka streams events. Redis caches state. Feature stores serve features. But under load, these systems break in subtle ways—your scoring API evaluates against state that never coexisted.

Velocity counters lag

The counter says 2 transactions. There are actually 5 in flight. You approve all of them.

Feature propagation delays

Your ML feature was fresh when computed. By the time the model scores, the world moved.

Cross-channel mismatch

Web sees one state, mobile sees another. Both score "low risk." Together, it's fraud.

Sound Familiar?

The struggles we hear every week

These aren't edge cases. They're Tuesday.

The pattern was obvious. In hindsight.

A compromised card hits your system. By the time your batch model flags it, there are 47 approved transactions across 12 merchants. The chargeback paperwork alone takes a week.

You're not catching fraud — you're processing claims.

Mobile says yes. Call center says no.

A customer calls, frustrated. Your app approved a transfer. Your phone rep sees a fraud hold. Same account, same minute, different answers.

Conflicting decisions erode trust faster than fraud erodes revenue.

The ring moved on before your rules caught up.

Your fraud team identifies a new pattern on Tuesday. The rules deploy Thursday. By Friday, the attackers have shifted tactics.

Static rules can't catch dynamic adversaries.

Your pipeline is real-time. Your state isn't.

Kafka streams the event in 50ms. But your velocity counter updated 3 seconds ago. Your fraud score evaluated against state that never existed together.

Fast queries on inconsistent state is just well-documented loss.

The Goal

Transactional correctness, not just speed

A fraud decision without a transactional state update is a suggestion, not enforcement. You need decisions and state mutations in the same boundary—atomically.

Decision and velocity update in the same transaction
Every channel scores against identical state
Risk flags propagate before the next request arrives
No window where concurrent requests see stale counters

Where Latency Matters

Every fraud use case has a latency budget. Miss it, and the transaction clears before your model scores it.

< 50ms

CNP Fraud

Score during authorization

Real-time

Account Takeover

Cross-channel correlation

Live

Velocity

Detect rapid-fire patterns

Unified

Ring Detection

Multi-account signals

What to Evaluate

When comparing fraud infrastructure, these four dimensions separate real-time systems from batch pipelines with a fast API.

Latency

Sub-100ms during auth

vs. Minutes to hours

Freshness

Sub-second features

vs. Last pipeline run

Consistency

Single view across channels

vs. Siloed systems

Adaptability

Real-time thresholds

vs. Static rules

How Tacnode Delivers

Every channel scores against identical state

All signals converge in the Context Lake. Every scoring request sees the same point-in-time snapshot—no cross-channel mismatch, no stale velocity counters.

Watch the detection pipeline

Transaction initiated

Card-not-present

Input

Online Purchase

Card-not-present

Amount$847.00
MerchantElectronics Store
TypeCNP

Context Lake

Tacnode

Output

Fraud Score0.00
LowMediumHigh

Risk Factors

Device fingerprinthigh
Geographic velocityhigh
Transaction velocitymedium
Behavioral patternhigh

Is this your problem?

If your fraud decisions touch shared mutable state—velocity counters, risk flags, account limits—and that state changes faster than your scoring layer refreshes it, you need transactional correctness.

When you need this

  • Transaction volume where batch windows matter
  • Multiple channels scoring the same accounts
  • Velocity counters, risk flags, or limits that update mid-transaction
  • Auth latency budgets under 100ms

When you don't

  • Manual review is acceptable
  • Low transaction volume
  • Single-channel operation
  • Seconds of latency tolerable

Stop catching fraud after the loss

We'll walk through your fraud stack and show you where latency windows create exposure.