case management vendor evaluation: key to enterprise success · pdf filecase management vendor...

© 2015 Aite Group LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this report by any means is strictly prohibited. Photocopying or electronic distribution of this document or any of its contents without prior written consent of the publisher violates U.S. copyright law, and is punishable by statutory damages of up to US$150,000 per infringement, plus attorneys’ fees (17 USC 504 et seq.). Without advance permission, illegal copying includes regular photocopying, faxing, excerpting, forwarding electronically, and sharing of online access.

Case Management Vendor Evaluation: Key to Enterprise Success

AUGUST 2015

Shirley Inscoe

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.

Case Management Vendor Evaluation: Key to Enterprise Success August 2015

© 2015 Aite Group LLC. All rights reserved. Reproduction of this report by any means is strictly prohibited. 101 Arch Street, Suite 501, Boston, MA 02110 • Tel +1.617.338.6050 • Fax +1.617.338.6078 • [email protected] • www.aitegroup.com

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS IMPACT POINTS .............................................................................................................................................. 5

INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................................. 6

METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................................................................ 6

MARKETPLACE BACKGROUND ........................................................................................................................ 9

CASE MANAGEMENT KEY COMPONENTS ..................................................................................................... 11

ALERT MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................................. 11

CASE INVESTIGATIONS ............................................................................................................................ 12

WORKFLOW ............................................................................................................................................ 14

REPORTING ............................................................................................................................................. 15

REGULATORY REPORTING ....................................................................................................................... 15

LOSS ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................ 16

TECHNOLOGY EVOLUTION............................................................................................................................ 17

MARKET DEMAND .................................................................................................................................. 18

PRICING AND MARKET SIZING ................................................................................................................ 19

VENDOR PROFILES ........................................................................................................................................ 20

ARGO ....................................................................................................................................................... 20

BAE SYSTEMS .......................................................................................................................................... 21

BOTTOMLINE (FORMERLY INTELLINX) .................................................................................................... 23

CUSTOMERXPS ........................................................................................................................................ 25

FICO ....................................................................................................................................................... 26

FISERV ..................................................................................................................................................... 28

JACK HENRY............................................................................................................................................. 30

LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS ................................................................................................................... 31

NICE ACTIMIZE ........................................................................................................................................ 32

PEGASYSTEMS ......................................................................................................................................... 33

TONBELLER .............................................................................................................................................. 34

PRODUCT FEATURES BY VENDOR ................................................................................................................. 36

ALERT MANAGEMENT............................................................................................................................. 36

INVESTIGATIONS ..................................................................................................................................... 38

WORKFLOW ............................................................................................................................................ 41

REPORTING ............................................................................................................................................. 42

REGULATORY COMPLIANCE .................................................................................................................... 43

LOSS ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................................................ 44

SYSTEMS .................................................................................................................................................. 46

VENDOR AWARDS......................................................................................................................................... 49

LEADER IN THE NORTH AMERICAN SMALLER FI MARKET (LESS THAN US$10 BILLION IN ASSETS) ........ 49

LEADER IN LINK ANALYSIS AND VISUALIZATION ..................................................................................... 49

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



3

LEADER IN THE NORTH AMERICAN LARGE FI MARKET ........................................................................... 49

CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................................................ 50

RELATED AITE GROUP RESEARCH ................................................................................................................. 51

ABOUT AITE GROUP...................................................................................................................................... 52

AUTHOR INFORMATION ......................................................................................................................... 52

CONTACT ................................................................................................................................................. 52

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1: INTERVIEWED FIS BY ASSET SIZE .................................................................................................... 7

FIGURE 2: INTERVIEWED FIS BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION .............................................................................. 7

FIGURE 3: EXAMPLE OF CONSOLIDATED ALERTS ......................................................................................... 12

FIGURE 4: EXAMPLE OF LAW ENFORCEMENT CONTACT ORGANIZATION ................................................... 13

FIGURE 5: SAMPLE OF LINK ANALYSIS VISUALIZATION ................................................................................ 14

FIGURE 6: SAMPLE OF SAR CONFIRMATION DOCUMENTATION .................................................................. 16

FIGURE 7: GLOBAL ENTERPRISE CASE MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE MARKET SIZE ........................................ 19

LIST OF TABLES TABLE A: VENDOR PROFILES ........................................................................................................................... 8

TABLE B: VENDORS’ CASE MANAGEMENT OFFERINGS ................................................................................ 20

TABLE C: BAE SYSTEMS NETREVEAL’S KEY STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ............................. 23

TABLE D: INTELLINX ENTERPRISE ALERT & CASE MANAGER'S STRENGTHS AND IMPROVEMENT AREAS .... 24

TABLE E: CUSTOMERXPS CLARI5’S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ......................................... 26

TABLE F: FICO FALCON FRAUD MANAGER’S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT .......................... 27

TABLE G: FISERV CASE INVESTIGATION MANAGER'S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ............ 29

TABLE H: JACK HENRY BSA TASK MANAGEMENT’S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ............... 31

TABLE I: ACTIMIZE ENTERPRISE RISK CASE MANAGER’S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ....... 33

TABLE J: TONBELLER SIRON'S STRENGTHS AND AREAS OF IMPROVEMENT ................................................ 35

TABLE K: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—ALERT MANAGEMENT ....................................... 36

TABLE L: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—ALERT TYPES ...................................................... 37

TABLE M: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—INVESTIGATIONS .............................................. 39

TABLE N: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—SYSTEM INTERFACES ......................................... 39

TABLE O: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—CUSTOMER COMMUNICATIONS ....................... 40

TABLE P: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—WORKFLOW ....................................................... 41

TABLE Q: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—DEADLINE COMPLIANCE ................................... 42

TABLE R: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—REPORTING ........................................................ 43

TABLE S: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—REGULATORY COMPLIANCE .............................. 44

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



4

TABLE T: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—LOSS ANALYSIS .................................................. 45

TABLE U: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT CAPABILITIES—SYSTEM ............................................................. 46

TABLE V: CASE MANAGEMENT PRODUCT—OPERATIONAL IMPACT ............................................................ 47

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



5

IMPACT POINTS

Aite Group interviewed 25 anti-money laundering (AML) and fraud executives from

24 financial services companies between February and June 2015 to understand

their satisfaction with their vendor solutions, current pain points, and needs. All of

the vendors profiled herein also conducted demos for Aite Group and completed

Aite Group’s detailed request for information.

Enterprise case management can provide many benefits to a financial institution.

Opportunity still exists for many vendors to deepen their capability set to meet FIs’

complex and evolving needs.

Financial institutions worldwide increasingly have the same needs, particularly as

regulatory agencies in Asia, Africa, India, and the Middle East have strengthened

AML requirements.

Many solution providers initially focused on the AML area and added fraud

capabilities at a later point. Alert management is often quite strong, meeting the

needs of AML departments and fraud-prevention departments well.

Solution providers that offer fraud-prevention capabilities often build “case

management” as a capability to aggregate and work all prevention alerts. Some of

these providers do not offer true case management to meet the needs of

investigators who work on lengthy, complicated financial crimes.

Solutions that meet the needs of the AML, fraud prevention, or financial crime

investigations groups are plentiful; finding solutions that satisfy the needs of all

three groups is more difficult.

Opportunities abound as providers continue to refine their products to meet the

needs of all enterprise constituents. Truly listening to unmet customer needs can

help solution providers better meet enterprise needs: improving operational

efficiency, demonstrating regulatory compliance, and retaining happy clients while

attracting new ones.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



6

INTRODUCTION

“A single, unambiguous aim is the keystone of successful military operations. Selection and

maintenance of the aim is regarded as the master principle of war.”1

The war against financial crimes is being waged constantly, but the bad guys are often more

innovative than the good ones; this is possible since no business case needs to be compiled or

approved and no lengthy IT project is necessary to commit nefarious acts. The bad guys are using

automation more and more to decrease the human element and reduce the investment

required to commit crimes; the end result is that they are able to attack smaller financial

institutions and focus their attention on corporate entities as well. At the rate that hackers are

attacking government agencies, retailers, financial institutions (FIs) and others, this may be the

number one threat against the U.S. economy in just a few years.

It is appropriate to use a war analogy in fighting financial crimes, as many view this as a form

financial warfare. All wars affect innocent bystanders, and in this war, consumers and businesses

are often adversely affected as well as governments and other entities. This war is being

engaged on many fronts simultaneously—the Internet, mobile, contact centers, ATMs, points of

sale and branches or stores, and back offices. Only with effective weapons can any financial

institution hope to win key battles, let alone the war. Case management solutions, one key way

to achieve a complete view of customer activity and detect cross-channel fraud, are one of the

most important tools in the good guys’ arsenals.

Many solution providers offer case management products, but not all are created equal. This

Impact Report, which evaluates the vendors of enterprise case management technology, is the

third in a three-part series. The first report evaluates the vendors of suspicious activity

monitoring,2 and the second evaluates the vendors of watch-list filtering technology.

3

METHODOLOGY

Aite Group interviewed 25 financial institution executives between February and June 2015 to

understand their satisfaction with their vendor solutions, current pain points, and market needs.

Breakdowns of FI participants by size and geographic location are shown in Figure 1 and Figure 2.

1. “Joint Doctrine Publication 0-01: British Defense Doctrine, Fourth Edition,” U.K. Ministry of Defense,

November, 2011.

2. See Aite Group’s report Global AML Vendor Evaluation: Managing Rapidly Escalating Risk, June 2015.

3. See Aite Group’s report Watch-List Filtering Vendor Evaluation: Separating the Wheat From the Chaff, August 2015.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.

http://aitegroup.com/report/global-aml-vendor-evaluation-managing-rapidly-escalating-risk

http://aitegroup.com/report/watch-list-filtering-vendor-evaluation-separating-wheat-chaff



7

Figure 1: Interviewed FIs by Asset Size

Source: Aite Group interviews with 25 financial executives, February to June 2015

Figure 2: Interviewed FIs by Geographic Location

Source: Aite Group interviews with 25 financial executives, February to June 2015

The vendors profiled herein also conducted demos for Aite Group and completed Aite Group’s

detailed request for information. Eight of the companies provided bank customer references

who were each interviewed concerning their experiences and levels of satisfaction with the case

management products. Several companies were invited to participate in this research, but

Less than $5 billion20%

$5 billion to $10 billion12%

$11 billion to $100 billion36%

Greater than $100 billion32%

Participating FIs by Asset Size(In US$; N=25)

North America56%

South America4%

Europe, the Middle East, and Africa

24%

Asia-Pacific16%

Breakdown of Participants by Geographic Region(N=25)

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



8

declined for various reasons. These companies include ACI Worldwide, FIS, IBM, Oracle, SAS, and

TCS. Information about the vendors that participated in this evaluation is shown in Table A.

Table A: Vendor Profiles

Company name

Headquarters Year founded

Structure Number of employees

Number of case management clients

Top two markets

Argo Richardson, TX

1980 Privately held

Less than 500

290 United States

BAE Systems Guildford, U.K.

1970 FTSE: BAE Systems

90,000 165 Americas, Europe

Bottomline (formerly Intellinx)

Portsmouth, NH

1989 Nasdaq: EPAY

1,500 27 United States

CustomerXPs Bangalore, India

2007 Privately held

55 Not disclosed India, South America

Fico San Jose, CA 1956 NYSE: FICO

2,850 1,200+ United States, Europe

Fiserv Brookfield, WI

1984 Nasdaq: FISV

21,000 1,100+ Americas, Europe

Jack Henry Monett, MO 1976 Nasdaq: JKHY

4,800 606 United States

LexisNexis Risk Solutions

Atlanta, GA 2000 Privately held

3,626 Not disclosed United States

Nice Actimize New York 1999 Nasdaq: NICE

633 plus contractors

300+ United States, Europe

Pegasystems Cambridge, MA

1983 Nasdaq: PEGA

3,002 Not disclosed North America, Europe

Tonbeller Bensheim, Germany

1971 Acquired by Fico

120 1,000+ Europe, Middle East

Source: Aite Group, vendor data

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



9

MARKETPLACE BACKGROUND

Over the past few decades, fraud attacks against FIs and payment systems have become

increasingly more complex. Initially, most attacks involved counterfeit, forged, or altered checks.

Banks responded by implementing a variety of fraud-prevention systems to detect suspicious

items that were being deposited and cleared against their customers’ accounts, and to monitor

for kiting activity (drawing against uncollected funds). Next, credit cards became targets, later

followed by debit cards. Different, real-time prevention systems were required to detect

suspicious activity. Later, the ACH network introduced check conversion, and fraud quickly

followed in a payment system that had always been considered very secure. Wire transfer fraud

has existed for decades, but attempts have become increasingly sophisticated, often involving

bank or email account takeover to commit the fraud.

On top of all the types of payment system fraud, channel fraud has become a huge issue. FIs

often implement special systems to detect online or mobile account takeover, contact center

fraud, and malware on customer computers. Behavioral analytics and various biometric

comparisons are often used to ensure the person trying to conduct business or transactional

activity is actually the customer and not an imposter with ill intent. Not only do FIs have to guard

against identity theft with new account applications but synthetic identities continue to be a

major method used by the bad guys to open new accounts and gain access to payment systems.

Increasingly, financial institution executives have come to understand that they simply must

corral all these point solutions and “see” everything taking place on a specific account to

determine whether activity is suspicious. Aggregating all the fraud alerts in one case

management system is the simplest method of accomplishing this objective. Demand for

products that will enable the FI to achieve this full customer-activity view is growing as more and

more financial institutions realize how important it is. A side benefit of doing this is that

aggregating all fraud alerts on specific accounts enables fraud analysts to make more informed

decisions and may even allow some alerts to be handled automatically; this is especially helpful

since some prevention systems generate high false positives.

Similarly, money laundering efforts have escalated over recent years as criminals become much

more adept at hiding their ill-gotten gains and moving funds internationally to obscure their

origins. Often it is difficult at first glance to tell if a customer is legitimate or if funds are “dirty”

money. Regulatory bodies in Asia, India, and the Middle East are becoming more stringent in

their examinations, leading to a need for better analytics and case management worldwide.

Concurrently, increasingly sophisticated investigators’ needs have evolved, and so have their

requirements for case management products. The number of active fraud cases each

investigator must juggle has grown tremendously; organizational tools and reminders are

essential to solving cases, meeting regulatory deadlines, and complying with internal charge-off

time frames. In addition, workflows that enable specific steps to be taken for each type of case

can ensure novice investigators don’t skip key steps in attempting to recover funds or fail to

comply with regulatory requirements. Desired management reviews and approvals can also be

built into workflow to ensure steps aren’t bypassed or forgotten.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



10

Of course, management must also be able to monitor all staff members’ work and produce

various reports to demonstrate the department’s results. A case management system can be a

great tool in streamlining these processes by providing job performance metrics for each

individual and allowing specific ad hoc reports to be created from the case management

system’s data. Employees who have specific metrics related to their job requirements can easily

track their own performances so there are no surprises at review time. Specialized ad hoc

reports may be requested periodically by regulators, or internal or external auditors, in addition

to regular monthly and quarterly management reports that demonstrate the department’s

performance.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



11

CASE MANAGEMENT KEY COMPONENTS

The aim of most enterprise risk management (ERM) shops is to attain a complete view and

understanding of a particular customer or account to determine whether financial activity is

legitimate, fraudulent, or money laundering. Case management is the basis for effective ERM

because it represents one key way to achieve a complete view of customer activity and to detect

cross-channel fraud. While point solutions can prove very effective in managing certain fraud

types, no combination of point solutions can bring all the data together in one place to afford a

view of activity across the entire range of customer activity.

In addition to helping to more effectively combat financial crimes, case management can provide

tremendous operational efficiency gains and help demonstrate full or partial compliance with

various consumer regulations. In addition, a case management product that can also be used by

the AML department, corporate security (to track robberies and other cases), and other

corporate departments is desirable to support many areas of the enterprise.

To meet the needs of an entire enterprise, case management products must have a wide variety

of features. These key components typically relate to the following:

Alert management for fraud, AML, physical security, and information security

Case management for lengthier, more detailed investigations

Workflow mechanisms to automate certain processes and enable operational

efficiencies

Management reporting

Regulatory compliance features

Fraud loss analysis

ALERT MANAGEMENT

Alert management refers to the capability of presenting various types of alerts to an analyst for

review. The alerts may be of various types, such as fraud-prevention alerts, AML alerts, or

information security alerts. Alerts are typically generated from some type of detection solution

or in-house-developed code. Many of the alerts may be generated by different detection

modules provided by the case management system’s technology vendor, but the ability to

import alerts from other providers is important for the FI to obtain a complete view of what is

happening with a specific customer or to see all the activity across a customer’s accounts. This is

sometimes referred to as a “360-degree view” of a customer or account.

An institution that has a large number of analysts working alerts can benefit from an alert

management capability to pull them together, particularly if it aggregates alerts on the same

account or customer. For example, if one fraud-prevention system produces an alert on a

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



12

customer check because its check number is out of sequence, and an alert from another

prevention system indicates the check maker’s signature is suspicious, seeing both alerts

together allows an analyst to view the check image and have all the information necessary to

return the check. In addition, one analyst has quickly handled two alerts that would formerly

have been worked separately by two analysts, one or both of whom might have called the

customer to ask if the check was legitimate. These time savings add up when repeated

throughout the workday, yielding a much more efficient operation; customer service also

increases since one analyst has enough data to make the right decision without impacting the

customer at all.

Several vendors provide the ability to show multiple alerts; Figure 3 displays a screen shot of this

capability. As the screen indicates, three different alerts on the same customer appear in the

analyst’s queue.

Figure 3: Example of Consolidated Alerts

Source: Nice Actimize

CASE INVESTIGATIONS

For a case management product to be truly useful at the enterprise level, it must also support

case investigations, whether they be for fraud, AML, physical security, or other purposes. While

many believe alert management is just a subset of case management, these truly are two

different things with different requirements. Alerts are typically prevention or detection tools,

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



13

while cases are often created after funds have left the FI or a customer reports fraudulent

activity on his or her account.

Cases may need to be investigated over a long period of time, and many interactions with the

customer, suspects, or law enforcement may need to be documented. Being able to attach many

different types of documents and files to an electronic case helps keep the investigator organized

and makes these items easy to retrieve when needed. Documents may range from images of

fraudulent checks to customer communications; in addition, clips from ATM security video or

branch cameras may need to be maintained if suspects were photographed. Case files may need

to be shared with local, state, or federal law enforcement agencies. Case files that are organized

and easy to review can determine whether a law enforcement agent accepts a case or not, so

this is very important. Of course, some cases will also result in suspicious activity or other

regulatory reports needing to be filed, and a solution that assists with that process makes an

investigator’s job much easier. Some case management solutions help investigators keep

information about their law enforcement contacts organized so the data is always available and

easy to locate (Figure 4).

Figure 4: Example of Law Enforcement Contact Organization

Source: Intellinx

In addition, certain tools within case management can really help an investigator be more

successful in conducting investigations. Two key capabilities are link analysis, which can help tie

various people, accounts, or activities together, and visualization tools that allow the

investigator to see and understand intricate relationships. An example is shown in Figure 5.

Automated tools such as these save an investigator a lot of time, and quick responses often

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



14

make the difference in being able to retrieve funds that have already left the FI. Additional

capabilities that can be really helpful include documenting and monitoring repayment

agreements, results of small claims court, or lawsuit settlements, etc. If repayments are not

being received as scheduled, reminders are helpful in initiating contact with the customer or

perpetrator again.

Figure 5: Sample of Link Analysis Visualization

Source: BAE Systems

WORKFLOW

Workflow capabilities are very important to achieve consistent processes, improve operational

efficiency, and demonstrate regulatory compliance. Particularly in large FIs, turnover of analyst

and investigator roles requires the regular addition of new personnel. Using workflow enables

supervisors to send work across to multiple team members, facilitates escalations, automates

transfers to the next step in a process, and creates many other efficiencies. Workflow techniques

also ensure relatively inexperienced personnel can learn on the job by relying on the system to

prompt him or her to take specific steps in working an alert or investigating a case. Specific steps

may be mandatory in the workflow, not allowing further work to be done until completed, to

ensure that all appropriate steps are taken to protect customer accounts against fraud or to

detect money laundering. In the same vein, because consistent processes are required and

enforced by the case management system, regulators can easily see what exceptions were made

and determine whether the FI is in compliance with certain specific requirements. Using

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



15

workflow, some steps in the process may be automated, or cases may flow from one group to

another, eliminating unnecessary delays and ensuring deadlines are met.

REPORTING

Financial institutions need many types of reports and dashboards out of the enterprise case

management solution. The types of reports needed include management reports documenting

individual performance metrics for analysts and investigators, reports with details about specific

situations (e.g., potential large-dollar losses or exceptions), and departmental performance

reports that may need to compare current month reports to prior month reports or to reports

from same month in the prior year. If charge-offs are performed via case management, financial

reports can be created showing potential losses and actual losses, and comparing actual results

to budgets. Reports are vital to show that the department is performing its primary function well

or to demonstrate needed improvement. For example, if alert or case volume is severely

backlogged, reporting can help demonstrate the escalation of fraud attempts and the need to

add staff or contractors.

In addition to standard out-of-the-box reports, many FIs desire the ability to create ad hoc

reports or additional standard reports without IT or vendor intervention. This flexibility allows

them to meet the requests of executive management, internal or external auditors, and

regulators during examinations.

REGULATORY REPORTING

Case management systems can help FIs to demonstrate compliance with a number of

regulations by generating reports, such as suspicious activity reports (SARs). This is a big benefit

for the FI when a regulatory examination occurs, and details can be pulled out of the system to

be shared with the lead examiner. By applying consistent processes and automating specific

tasks, compliance is easier to achieve and demonstrate.

In addition to documenting compliance with specific regulations, countries have requirements

for various money laundering and Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA)-related

governmental reports. Case management systems can be very helpful in complying with these

requirements by prompting personnel in alerts or cases where reporting is required, prefilling

many of the fields on the appropriate form, automatically filing the reports, and retrieving

confirmation that the report was received as well as any communication from the regulatory

body that the report should be amended or corrected. Figure 6 shows a sample of a screenshot

documenting that an SAR filing is confirmed as received by the Financial Crimes Enforcement

Network (FinCEN).

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



16

Figure 6: Sample of SAR Confirmation Documentation

Source: Fiserv

LOSS ANALYSIS

Loss analysis is a key component required to assist FIs in maximizing their fraud loss-prevention

efforts. Determining the root cause of a loss enables the FI to determine if it has a prevention

solution in place for that type of event, whether existing technology can be used to create a

solution, and to help identify losses taken due to the gap and build a business case for new in-

house code or a new technology solution to fill it. If a prevention solution is in place, identifying

the root cause of a loss can help ensure that the system is operating correctly and that an alert

was created. If so, the analyst who handled the alert can be provided additional training or

mentored to prevent the same mistake. Some case management systems can also facilitate an

automated feedback loop into the detection engine to help better train the model, resulting in

improved future results.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



17

TECHNOLOGY EVOLUTION

When case management products were initially developed, they focused exclusively on fraud,

AML, or security cases and enabled investigators to look into a specific situation and record the

results of their efforts, often in a comments section. The products were simplistic but met FIs’

basic needs. Bulky paper files were the norm, and investigators manually documented each step

taken over the course of the investigation, filling up file cabinets. Over the years, needs have

become much more complex, whether related to fraud or other financial crimes, with many

areas of the enterprise needing to use such products; solution providers have responded in a

variety of ways.

Today, many case management products can meet a wide variety of needs. Some may allow an

institution to pull all fraud-prevention or AML alerts together to gain a full understanding of all

activity on an account or customer; another may enable full case investigations, replacing paper

files and streamlining electronic SARs, or sharing case files with local, state, or federal law

enforcement personnel. Unfortunately, few products fulfil both of these major needs well, but

some do provide capabilities to streamline or automate some processes. Of course, many FIs

also desire to use the same product in their fraud, AML, corporate security, information security,

or other divisions in the bank, hence, the need for “enterprise” case management solutions that

can handle both alerts and full investigations for a wide variety of needs.

Each company that participated in this research can assist in the battle against fraudsters and

money launderers, but each FI will need to define its needs to determine which product is the

best fit for its unique environment. In most cases, solutions will require some level of

customization, which is typically done during implementation.

There may also be a need for a case management system that all investigators within the FI can

use, regardless of the type of case being worked. A case that has been investigated and

determined fraud free but looks suspiciously like money laundering can easily be forwarded to

the AML department, maintaining a documented record of all the work performed to avoid

duplication of effort. Or, repetitive claims by a customer constantly disputing legitimate

transactions can be viewed in conjunction with a personal injury lawsuit regarding a fall in the

branch when no branch personnel are aware of such an incident. In such circumstances, being

aware of the customer’s history may be significant.

Finally, some FIs desire a case management solution that does all of the above and much more.

As cross-channel fraud proliferates and more institutions understand the need to detect it, the

desire to aggregate and decision fraud-prevention alerts and investigate all types of cases in one

system grows. Regulators are encouraging banks to consider case management systems that

allow them a full view of activity on a particular account or customer to provide superior fraud

prevention and detection, and to detect money laundering more readily. An additional benefit of

a case management solution that provides all of this functionality is that cases can be created in

fraud prevention and moved to an investigative unit for further work when needed. Again, this

provides enhanced operational efficiency and decreases duplication of effort since no rekeying

of data (which also reduces manual errors) is necessary. As a side benefit, it strengthens

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



18

teamwork among the workforce and creates a potential job progression so talented personnel

can be rewarded, promoted, and retained. Turnover is expensive, and experienced personnel

typically can handle much heavier workloads than new employees who don’t understand the

intricacies of money laundering or fraud.

MARKET DEMAND

Regulators in many countries are encouraging FIs to use case management systems in AML and

fraud departments to pull data together whether the AML and fraud organizations are combined

organizationally in the same business unit or not. Regulators understand these products’ ability

to provide a more complete understanding of customer activity and also appreciate ad hoc

reports that can be produced with relative ease. Lastly, these products can often produce

evidence of consistent compliance with certain regulations and reports showing any exceptions

(e.g., any Regulation E disputes that did not receive provisional credit within 10 days of a

customer’s unauthorized activity claim). Proactive managers can look at such reports regularly

and identify training, mentoring, or disciplinary needs among personnel so they can approach an

audit or exam with confidence.

Even more important than regulatory encouragement, FI executives are increasingly

understanding that they need to detect cross-channel fraud, and case management is an

effective way to do so. Fraud alerts are so prolific (and volume continues to grow rapidly), no

human being can manually study myriad alerts and envision how they relate to a single incident

quickly enough to be effective. Automated solutions that can help fraud personnel tie alerts

together, understand the sequence of events, and understand relationships among parties are

often crucial to seeing an organized fraud ring or a sophisticated money laundering scheme.

Recognizing these situations swiftly enables the FI to take countermeasures to protect itself and

its customers, thereby radically reducing potential losses. Similarly, detecting money laundering

activity, and all the parties involved, can help protect the FI against large monetary penalties,

fines, and negative publicity.

In some parts of the world, such as Asia and India, regulators are emphasizing money laundering

compliance much more strongly than they did in the past. FIs in these countries may be seeking

systems to support their compliance efforts for the first time, providing greenfield opportunities

to solution providers. The market is also experiencing some contraction in case management

solution providers due to larger companies acquiring smaller technology firms. Conversely, new

companies continue to arise and bring new products to market. In recent years, products from

ICMS and Digital Harbor were acquired and sunset, leaving many user FIs in need of replacement

products. Some FIs have delayed replacing the unsupported product, but this is yet another

aspect of increasing market demand.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



19

PRICING AND MARKET S IZ ING

Average large-bank deal sizes for an enterprise case management product start in the low to mid

seven-figure range. The cost for midsize banks typically starts in the mid to high six-figure range

and can climb to the low seven figures. The average annual support and maintenance cost is

between 15% and 20% of the license fee. For small banks, the average first-year cost is between

US$7,500 and US$50,000, depending on the FI’s size, with similar ongoing maintenance fees. A

small number of vendors use subscription pricing based on the number of users instead of using

license pricing. Based on the number of installations reported by the vendors as well as the

average pricing, Aite Group estimates the market for enterprise case management software to

be just over US$0.95 billion in 2015, growing to US$1.58 billion in 2019 (Figure 7).

Figure 7: Global Enterprise Case Management Software Market Size

Source: Aite Group

$0.95 $1.07

$1.19

$1.32

$1.45

$1.58

2014 e2015 e2016 e2017 e2018 e2019

Global Enterprise Case Management Market, 2014 to e2019(In US$ billions)

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



20

VENDOR PROFILES

The key components of enterprise case management are provided in varying degrees by each of

the vendors participating in this evaluation. This section is based on information provided by

vendors through request for information responses, phone interviews, product demos, feedback

from client references, and Aite Group’s own knowledge of the industry. Table B summarizes this

report’s profiled vendors and their enterprise case management capabilities. A check mark ()

indicates that a vendor fully meets the bulk of the component’s needs, a check mark and an

asterisk (*) indicate that some of the needs are met, and a blank field indicates that the

product meets few to no enterprise needs.

Table B: Vendors’ Case Management Offerings

Company name Alert management

Investigations Workflow Reporting Regulatory compliance

Loss analysis

Argo * * *

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs *

FICO *

Fiserv *

Jack Henry * * *


* * *

Nice Actimize

Pegasystems *

Tonbeller * *


ARG O

Argo is well-known in financial services in North America (with over 290 client banks) providing

teller and lending systems through direct sales and partnerships (particularly core systems

providers). Argo’s go-to-market strategy combines direct sales and partnerships with FIS and

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



21

Fiserv. More recently, the company has expanded to offer similar products in the Asia-Pacific.

Argo’s case management and fraud capabilities are developed using this same platform, with the

Oasis case management being fully integrated with Argo Teller and Payments.

Along with being a reporting tool, Oasis also analyzes data and alerts the analyst to suspicious

activity at both the account and customer level, which gives the institution a holistic approach to

monitoring suspicious activity. The solution’s strengths include reduction of costs (operational,

maintenance, and staff), reduction of false positives, and improved workflow.

R E L E V A N T A C Q U I S I T I O N S

In the summer of 2013, Argo acquired Advanced Software Design Corporation (ASDC), based in

Toronto. Argo plans to continue its strategic expansion of software solutions, adding core

competencies in analytical methods for pattern recognition around neural networks, case

management, and image analytics. Fully integrating ASDC’s capabilities into Argo’s fraud-

prevention and case management products continues to be a point of emphasis for the

company.

P L A N N E D E N H A N C E M E N T S

While Oasis case management currently focuses primarily on producing real-time alerts and

alert management, development of new capabilities is well underway. During the next 24

months, Argo plans continued integration with the teller platform along with additional fraud,

compliance, and treasury management enhancements.

V E N D O R A N A L Y S I S

A competitive advantage for Argo Data is that its case management solution is fully integrated

with the Argo Teller Payments application (enabling real-time fraud detection at the teller line);

it is also fully integrated with Argo Fraud and AML products, and it provides a holistic, centrally

managed case management solution capable of being deployed across both the fraud and

compliance divisions within a financial institution utilizing a continuous workflow. The product is

new, though, and no references were provided to Aite Group to speak with. The demo provided

was impressive, although the enterprise solution itself is still in its infancy.

BAE SYSTEMS

BAE Systems is a global defense, aerospace, and security company with clients in over 90

countries. Its emphasis on working with global law enforcement and intelligence agencies lends

itself well to providing solutions to combat all types of financial crimes.

The business case for the BAE Systems case management product is typically to improve

operational efficiency, primarily by reducing the number of manual steps and reducing data

entry (thereby also preventing manual keying errors). The ability to bring multiple alert types

into a single case management solution that meets constantly changing regulations is also

important. When the BAE Systems case management product is deployed alongside BAE Systems

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



22

analytical detection solutions in compliance or fraud, alert and case dispositions are fed back

into the analytical detection engines to help enhance future detection, increasing effectiveness.

Historically, BAE Systems has used direct sales exclusively but plans to begin enlisting strategic

partners in 2015. Case management is often sold on its own or as part of an enterprise fraud or

compliance package. During the next two years, BAE’s expansion strategy is to expand into new

territories and upsell within its existing customer base.


The company has invested in several acquisitions to enhance its capabilities while continuing to

develop and enhance products internally. In 2011, BAE acquired Norkom, a provider of

innovative counterfraud and anti-money laundering solutions to the global financial services

industry, and ETI, a Danish cybersecurity firm. In 2012, BAE Systems acquired Stratsec, the

largest cybersecurity company in Australia, increasing its footprint in Southeast Asia and

Australia, and in 2014 BAE acquired Perimeter Internetworking Corporation (trading as

Silversky), a leading commercial cyberservices provider with principal operations in the United

States and the Philippines.


BAE Systems plans to enhance the case management product in the following areas:

User experience enhancements with a focus on efficiency and lower training needs

User personalization capabilities within the user interface (UI)

Expansion of standard case investigation types

Enhanced reporting packs


Aite Group spoke with three BAE System customers using NetReveal Enterprise Investigation

Management. Two of these references are midsize banks, while the last is a large securities and

investment firm; all are located in the United States. On a combined basis, the three institutions

use the product for many types of AML, fraud prevention, and investigations as well as physical

security use cases.

The BAE Systems enterprise case management solution can be deployed across all investigation

verticals, drawing on the experience from those different verticals to enhance others. The ability

to integrate external alerts from other detection engines as well as critical banking systems is a

competitive advantage, and the inclusion of social network visualization based on case

management data helps investigators rapidly understand relationships within a fraud network.

When asked about the strengths of the solution, the executives highlight the following points:

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



23

Open architecture: Allows a lot of ingested data from many sources.

Configurability: Users love it. It can be easily configured to meet the specific

requirements of the business unit.

System dependability: Uptime is very good, and it does what it is supposed to do.

Sales organization: Very good personnel who understand the business needs.

Executives would like to see BAE Systems improve in the following ways:

Usability: Interface is not intuitive and needs a good Web designer to improve it so

it requires less training for users (Table C).

Configurability: A strength becomes a weakness. After customization, releases are

very time-consuming and difficult to implement, delaying the advantages of new

functionality.

Table C: BAE Systems NetReveal’s Key Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Open architecture Intuitiveness

Configurability

System dependability

Sales organization

Source: Aite Group

BOT TOMLINE (FORMERLY INTELLINX)

Intellinx Ltd., which developed an enterprise case management solution (among other anti-fraud

solutions), was acquired by Bottomline Technologies in January 2015. As a result, Intellinx

became Bottomline’s Cyber Fraud & Risk Management (CFRM) Division. Intellinx has customers

in over 40 countries.

The case management solution, Enterprise Alert & Case Manager, is sold both directly and

through channel partners around the world. Most often, these are local system integrators that

sell, implement, and support the solution in their local territories. Going forward, Bottomline

Technologies plans to integrate Intellinx’s payments fraud solutions and services into

Bottomline’s payments products and services. All of Intellinx’s former anti-fraud capabilities,

case management, and AML solutions will be offered to existing Bottomline Technologies

customers.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



24


The main new feature in the next release will be the ability to file an SAR based on several

different cases.


Aite Group spoke with three U.S. clients using Intellinx’s case management solution for a wide

variety of fraud use cases (payments, loans, mortgages) as well as operational, noncredit losses

and physical security investigations. The size of the three ranged from small to very large in

terms of assets and volume handled.

Some of the strengths of the solution noted by executives include the following:

Flexible: Easy to work with and configure, and meets all needs

Complete solution: Handles alerts, dashboards, and workflows out of the box

Data ingestion: Ingests data easily from various sources, such as databases or big-

data vendors

Reporting: Excellent out-of-the-box reports and dashboards

Improved communications: Ability to have multiple people in a case

Complete case file: Ability to attach documents, photos, etc.

Executives also note a few improvements they would prefer:

Setup is key: If setup isn’t performed carefully, users may have to go through more

clicks than needed.

Workflow: This is robust but not graphical; visual workflow would be nice (Table D).

Extremely structured database: This adds an unnecessary level of complexity but

turns into a benefit for the users.

Table D: Intellinx Enterprise Alert & Case Manager's Strengths and Improvement Areas

Strengths Areas of improvement Flexibility Graphical workflow

All inclusive

Data ingestion

Reporting

Source: Aite Group

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



25

CUSTOMERXPS

CustomerXPs has 90% of its client base currently located in India, with the remaining 10% in

Mexico and South America. In 2015, the company plans to expand into North America with its

product offerings.

CustomerXPs’ Clari5 enterprise case management product provides a unified view across all

channels and products for both fraud and AML. A concept unique to the company is that of the

“living case or alert”; all the open alerts and cases get updated with raised or lowered risk scores

based on behavior observed for the customer or account after the alert or case is created. There

is also a feature to suppress alerts for specific customers or accounts and specific scenarios

based on the investigation outcome. Once a case is closed, the suppression feedback

transaction-monitoring engine will create updates to suppress future cases for that

customer/account for the time period desired. The solution also offers the ability to configure

different workflows for different investigation queues without requiring any code changes. Each

queue can have an assigned set of users, and the system automatically assigns cases to the users

based on the assignment logic.

The company sells its products through a variety of partners, including system integrators,

consulting and technology partners, and geographically located partners that focus on local sales

opportunities, such as those in the Asia-Pacific, Africa, and the Middle East. During the next 24

months, this young company plans to grow by achieving depth in current markets by riding on

strong regulatory changes and an evolving fraud management and AML landscape in these

markets; expanding into new markets (e.g., Western Europe and North America); diversifying

and expanding sales to other players in the value chain (i.e., retailers, payment gateways,

payment networks, and banks); increasing investment in sales and marketing with the possibility

of setting up sales offices in key locations; and designing a new sales model to gauge banks’

readiness for a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) model and subscription-based licensing.


The next case management release will have a comprehensive entity link analysis feature to help investigators uncover complex crime rings (with internal and external components) using visual link analysis capabilities. CustomerXPs has just launched a machine-learning capability, which is available for both the on-premises and cloud-based products. Also, the company will launch the federated anti-fraud network shortly, which will enable collaboration among its clients.


Aite Group spoke with three financial services customers that use CustomerXPs’ case

management solution; all three are located in India. The customers are using the solution across

a wide range of AML and fraud use cases.

Customers note that the primary strength of CustomerXPs’ solution is the ability to aggregate

alerts from various solutions that relate to a single customer. The only concern noted is that the

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



26

case management solution is designed on a Jira platform. Customization is dependent upon the

third-party platform the solution is built upon, which limits the bank’s options at times (Table E).

Table E: CustomerXPs Clari5’s Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Alert aggregation Designed on third-party platform

Source: Aite Group

F ICO

Fico is a worldwide company with clients in over 90 countries around the globe and over 1,000

clients just in the United States. The company has made great strides in recent years in

integrating various types of fraud prevention into its alert management system.

Differentiators for Fico’s Falcon Fraud Manager alert management system are configurability (all

grids, tables, screens, and tabs are user-configurable), easy administration (configuration and

setup can be done via operations administration, not requiring any IT intervention), and the one-

screen view, which displays all relevant data.

Fico sells its case management product through partners such as TSYS, FDR, FIS, Cognizant, and

others. During the next 24 months, Fico plans to expand the addressable market for its suite of

products and services by SaaS-enabling the product portfolio via the Fico analytic cloud,

expanding sales and distribution channels through strategic partnerships, and acquiring

companies that deliver solutions to financial services and adjacent industries.


Fico has expanded its capabilities dramatically in recent years, with several acquisitions at the

heart of the expansion. A list of acquisitions during recent years includes the following

companies:

Entiera (2012)

Adeptra (2012)

CR Software (2012)

Infoglide (2013)

InfoCentricity (2014)

Karmasphere (2014)

Tonbeller (2015)

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



27


The next release has a number of planned enhancements, including new optimizations to

improve performance, audit enhancements, transaction grid improvements, push notification

updates, and improvements for visually challenged users.


Aite Group spoke with two customer references for Fico’s case management solution. One is a

very large financial services company operating in the United States and Europe that uses the

solution for debit, credit, and deposit account fraud; the other is located in Asia and uses the

solution for payments fraud alerts. Fico’s solution supports fraud-alert investigations but not full-

fledged case investigations that require broader functionality.

Executives note several strengths of the solution as follows:

Flexible: It is built for future enhancement of transactions.

Profiling: Capabilities extend from cards to deposit accounts.

Multiple channels: Channels include phone, mobile, etc.

Web base: Product is very useful for analytics.

Customer centricity: View of all aggregated information is very important.

Customer communication: Solution enables optimal customer contact.

Areas where executives would like to see product improvement are as follows:

Customization: The ability to create specific features is desired (e.g., scoring alerts

and bringing back scores to agent or displaying internal scores side by side with Fico

scores so an agent can see differences and reasons for differences). Some desired

functionality had to be developed in-house.

Bulk upload function: Items in hot file currently have to be entered one by one

(Table F).

Table F: Fico Falcon Fraud Manager’s Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Flexibility Customization capability

Profiling capabilities Lack of bulk upload

Web base

Enables customer communication

Source: Aite Group

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



28

F ISERV

Fiserv is a core processor with clients in over 70 countries. Fiserv sells its products through direct

sales. Fiserv’s financial crime risk management solutions can be used on their own or in

conjunction with Fiserv’s core processing solutions.

Fiserv’s case management solution, Case Investigation Manager, includes the inherent flexibility

to empower financial institutions’ business users to develop and modify case structures and

workflows to reflect their unique processes. Fiserv focuses on financial crime remediation and

the capabilities that drive investigations; case management captures the data necessary to

quantify success. As one example, all the loss information and prevention information captured

in case management can be exported automatically to external accounting solutions. Banks can

also use the case management system to police itself. The solution can evaluate the likelihood

that an investigation will turn out to be genuine fraud based on predictive variables identified in

previous investigations, essentially using previous known “bads” to inform current cases.

A few of the solution’s overall benefits and key differentiators include an enterprise-wide

financial crime prevention solution that delivers an approach consistent with regulatory

recommendations, prioritization of alerts with the highest degree of risk, alignment with a risk-

based approach, investigation and analysis functionality that allows advanced drill-down and link

analysis uncovering suspicious networks and associations, and an intuitive UI that makes it easy

to zoom in on specific time intervals or events.


Fiserv has made a number of acquisitions in recent years and expanded its capabilities,

particularly in the area of fraud products. Acquired companies include M-Com, Maverick

Network Solutions, Credit Union On-Line Inc., and CashEdge Inc. in 2011 as well as Open

Solutions Inc. in 2013.


A recent release of the case management solution included a number of improvements, such as

enhanced self-service reporting capabilities to empower business users and additional

management dashboard facilities to enable oversight for operational efficiency and risk

mitigation. Also, an enhanced UI allows investigators to focus on the information that is most

relevant to their investigations. Further enhancements related to providing an overarching fraud

risk score for all customers are planned, as are further flexibility around workflows and work

queues.


Aite Group spoke with three clients that are using Fiserv’s case management solution. Two of the

clients are banks with under US$20 billion in assets located in the United States, while the third

is a very large bank located in Europe. All three use the solution for AML, and two use it for

fraud.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



29

Executives note strengths of the Fiserv case management solution as follows:

Robust: Ability for account-level and customer-level views

Fully electronic: Allows the investigator to save documents within the case and pass

the case to reviewer(s) electronically

Regulatory reporting: Allows for batch-filing SARs and currency transaction reports

(CTRs) to FinCEN and can import confirmation and document control numbers back

from FinCEN

Operational capabilities: Very good case filtering and powerful user configurability

All inclusive: Provides everything the bank needs

SAR creation: Prompts investigator when requirements for SAR are met

Executives also note some improvements they would like added to the case management

solution:

Report development: One bank had to make a considerable investment in

developing needed reports; it had to hire a Crystal reports expert for ongoing

reports. (The most recent product release contains a fully functional self-service

reporting capability, however.)

Configuration is complicated: Configuration is a time-consuming process unless

done through SQL scripts. It is very difficult to link consecutive drop-down boxes

with the options available.

Workflow: Moving through some workflows is time-consuming and click-intensive.

Speed: System can run slow if too many investigators are using it at once (Table G).

Table G: Fiserv Case Investigation Manager's Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Robust Report development

Fully electronic Ease of configuration

Case filtering Streamlined workflow

All inclusive Speed

Prompts when SAR is required

Source: Aite Group

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



30

JACK HENRY

Jack Henry is a core systems provider for 606 financial institutions that utilize Yellow Hammer

Case Management in the United States. The company offers an array of fraud-prevention alert

capabilities, all of which can be integrated and worked in its case management system. Tightly

integrated case management capabilities mean users often can’t tell where fraud prevention

ends and case management begins, but this is not a negative by any means. The only negative is

that the case management product is not offered to FIs that do not use Jack Henry’s core

systems. Jack Henry’s go-to-market strategy is limited to direct sales.

The Yellow Hammer Case Management system allows users to create tasks for review and then

escalate to a case as needed. The Case Management system allows users to collect fraud, AML,

and external data into a task or case and prefill an SAR with information collected from the case.

This streamlines the process of filing SARs, demonstrates regulatory compliance, and improves

operational efficiency.


Monthly new versions are released that include product enhancements and bug fixes.


Aite Group spoke with three small financial institution clients using Jack Henry’s case

management solution, all located in the United States. Two of the executives are responsible for

AML and use BSA Task Management for that purpose, while the third uses it for both AML and

fraud.

Overall, executives are very pleased with Jack Henry’s solution and note the following strengths:

Improved communications: Ability to have multiple people in a case

Complete case: Ability to attach all types of documents, photos, etc.

Paperless: Completely electronic cases in which analysts can create notes to

document decision rationale

Visual task list: Both for department overall and for individual users

Reminders: Email reminders when items are due, etc.

Complete view of the customer: Displays images, information from the core system,

and all transactions and alerts

Executives note a few improvements they would like to see in the product:

Reporting: Creating reports for cases needs to be more intuitive (Table H).

Customer type: Better distinction between consumer and business clients is

needed.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



31

Table H: Jack Henry BSA Task Management’s Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement All inclusive Reporting

Fully electronic

Complete view of customer

Improved internal communications

Source: Aite Group

LEXISNEXIS R ISK SOLUTIONS

LexisNexis has a strong presence in the United States, with 95% of its clients based there. That is

changing, however, with the beginnings of international growth in Europe and other markets.

Over 1,800 financial institutions of all sizes are currently using Bridger Insight XG, LexisNexis’

case management product. About 12% of these FIs license the product, while others use the

hosted version. LexisNexis’ strategy for growth in the next 24 months is to evolve core products,

develop new offerings, and expand in adjacent markets.

Bridger Insight XG provides one platform for entity screening against any sanctions,

enforcement, politically exposed persons (PEP) lists, any other structured data, Know Your

Customer (KYC) identity verification for multiple countries, enhanced due diligence, and the

fraud use case with an integrated fraud detection product.


New versions are released each month.


Aite Group did not speak with any references that are using LexisNexis’ Bridger Insight XG case

management solution. A demo was provided, which illustrated the product’s capabilities. Bridger

Insight XG differentiates itself via its support for list screening, support for LexisNexis’ identity

verification and fraud products, and the efficiency and accuracy gains achieved by feeding alert

decisions back into the decision engine to improve detection. The product has fairly strong alert

management capabilities but requires additional development to qualify as a true enterprise

solution. For example, a check image can be attached to an alert, but a check image cannot be

displayed in the product; alerts can be handled in the product, but case investigations cannot. To

date, the product has not been interfaced with General Ledger to book charge-offs or recoveries,

so that type of reporting has not been developed. Additional product development is needed to

meet the needs of various enterprise departments.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



32

NICE ACTIMIZE

Nice Actimize focuses primarily on midsize and large financial institutions, with over 1,100 total

client relationships in over 70 countries. Many of the world’s largest FIs use Actimize in some

manner to combat financial crimes; the latest version of the case management solution is

Enterprise Risk Case Manager 5.8 (ERCM).

Unified financial crime risk management across channels and lines of business, and operational

efficiency gains are the main business drivers for enterprise-wide case management. Nice

Actimize Enterprise Risk Case Manager is an operational hub that consolidates data from

disparate analytic and detection solutions, enabling FIs to apply consistent processes across

investigative teams, automate manual tasks, and collaborate across the enterprise, providing a

holistic view of financial crime risk management.

Nice Actimize’s go-to-market strategy includes direct sales as well as many distribution partners. For delivery and implementation, Actimize is using its own professional services organization and a growing list of delivery partners that are going through the Actimize certification process and will help with global coverage. A partial list of the Actimize distribution and delivery partners includes Cognizant, Tech Mahindra, Infosys, mPhasis, Genpact, and Matrix-Exzac.


Nice Actimize acquired Redkite Financial Markets, an emerging provider of real-time, cloud-

based institutional trade surveillance solutions in 2012. Other than this one acquisition, all new

development in the financial crimes solutions has been achieved internally.


Nice Actimize’s next releases will continue to focus on improved collaboration and productivity

capabilities and also include big-data integration, business and market intelligence reporting and

other data visualizations geared toward investigation efficiencies. Actimize is also enhancing the

Cases investigation module to provide more robust case investigations capabilities.


Aite Group spoke with four customers that use Nice Actimize’s case management solution; all of

these are large financial institutions. All three references use the solution for AML and fraud

prevention.

Executives mention many strengths of the product:

Ease of deployment: Implementation was easier than anticipated.

Out-of-the-box functionality: It allows all types of attachments, integrates with

email, etc. Workflows are easy to develop.

View of data: Ties a lot of things together, and users can view it all.

Personnel: Actimize’s support people know the business; they are not just IT people.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



33

In addition, there are desired improvements as follows:

Reporting: Some comes with case management, but for the most part, it falls short.

Data display: Unless you are using Integrated Fraud Management, you cannot see all

the data needed on one screen.

Sales: Sometimes oversell and underdeliver initially.

Case investigations: Customization is required just to get all the fields necessary

(Table I).

Table I: Actimize Enterprise Risk Case Manager’s Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Ease of deployment Reporting

Out-of-the-box functionality Case investigations

Data view

Knowledgeable personnel

Source: Aite Group

PEGASYSTEMS

Pegasystems has deployed its case management product, Pega 7, in hundreds of countries; some

extremely large FI clients have deployed the product worldwide.

The company differentiates itself by providing dynamic case management that supports both

agile and ad hoc reporting, and an omnichannel product that focuses on analytics, supports all

delivery channels, and provides a unified view of all activity.

Pega goes to market through direct sales as well as a number of partners that sell the product in

specific geographies. Examples of these partners include Accenture, Capgemini, Infosys,

Cognizant, Wipro, Tech Mahindra, and Tata Consultancy Services.


During the last three years, Pegasystems has made several key acquisitions to improve its

financial crime products, including Firefly (cobrowsing technology), MeshLabs (social media

analytics), and Antenna (mobile application development and management).


Major releases occur one or two times per year; Pegasystems did not share details of what the

next release will include.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



34


Pegasystems provided a detailed demo to showcase its case management product’s capabilities

and invited Aite Group to attend its user conference to meet potential references in person.

Attending the event was not possible due to schedule conflicts. Pega 7 appears to be a true

enterprise case management product that can handle the needs of many areas of an enterprise,

including AML, fraud prevention, and various types of investigations. While the demo was

extremely impressive, the lack of users to talk with makes it impossible to unconditionally state

that there are no gaps in the functionality required.

TONBELLER

Tonbeller was a privately held company, headquartered in Germany, until it was acquired earlier

this year by Fico. Tonbeller has over 1,000 FI clients in 90 countries, primarily in Europe, the

Middle East, and Africa.

With its Siron Anti-Financial Crime Solutions, Tonbeller offers a comprehensive portfolio for

banks, insurance providers, and corporations across all industries. The Siron Anti-Financial Crime

Solutions Suite consists of flexible software modules:

Risk Assessment

Anti-Money Laundering

Fraud Prevention & Detection

FATCA & Common Reporting Standard (CRS) Compliance

Counter-Terrorism Financing

Prevention of Market Abuse

Know Your Customer

Business Partner Due Diligence

Tonbeller sells direct but also has channel partners in many countries. These partners include

companies such as Bateleur Software in Johannesburg, B&F Soft in Egypt, Blitz IT Consultants in

Singapore and Vietnam, Decillion Group in Singapore and Vietnam, Decillion Group in Singapore,

Asseco in Turkey, Vitalis in Tunisia, SIA SSB Group in Italy, RDTEX in Russia, Printec in Greece (with

entities all over central and Eastern Europe), and IMTF in Switzerland.


The next release has a number of enhancements planned, including further optimizations to

improve performance; audit and reporting enhancements, such as CRS tax compliance

requirements; additional functionalities in KYC such as versioning of questionnaires; and new

alert management capabilities for Fraud Detection & Prevention.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



35


Aite Group spoke with executives from three financial institutions that use Tonbeller’s case

management solution. The institutions range from very small to very large; two are located in

Europe, and one is located in Africa. All three use Tonbeller for AML, not for any other use cases.

Executives share several strengths of Tonbeller’s case management product:

Working alerts: Allows users to attach many types of documents to an alert

Workflows: Very easy to customize to fit the bank’s needs

Dashboards: Provides a synthetic view of the major AML risks

Executives also share some improvements they would like to see:

Trend analysis: Receive tons of alerts, but no sense of trends that may exist in the

data

Data processing: Tends to be slow

Reporting: Limited, but bank’s understanding is that more reports are being created

(Table J)

Table J: Tonbeller Siron's Strengths and Areas of Improvement

Strengths Areas of improvement Electronic files attachment enabled Reporting trend analysis, more reports

Workflow ease of customization Slow data processing

Data view on dashboards

Source: Aite Group

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



36

PRODUCT FEATURES BY VENDOR

This section will detail some of the requirements FIs need within each of the key components of

enterprise case management.

ALERT MANAGEMENT

Alert management is one of the strongest areas for most of the vendors in this evaluation, since

many of them started out providing AML or fraud-prevention capabilities to FIs and expanded

their capabilities over time. In presenting alerts to analysts to be worked, it is important that all

data the analyst needs to make a decision about the alert be included. Dependent on the type of

alert, these fields may vary. Having to look at multiple screens to obtain the data needed is not

only time-consuming but can lead to analyst error, since data may be incorrectly recollected

after flipping to multiple screens quickly. Importing alerts from other vendor solutions and in-

house-developed code and aggregating those alerts allows the analyst a more complete

understanding of activity on a specific customer or account.

A financial institution may want to automate alert decisions in certain situations; for example,

management may choose to avoid manual review of check deposit fraud alerts for amounts less

than 50% of the average collected balance. Being able to automate such decisions and apply

them to daily volume can focus manpower on higher-risk alerts while improving productivity.

Many circumstances may require a case to be created from one or more alerts. Being able to do

this without having to rekey data avoids manual errors and improves operational efficiency. Last,

it is important to feed the decisions made on alerts back into prevention capabilities to improve

future performance through machine learning or to maintain a clean history for certain

solutions. Table K displays whether each vendor meets the specific need related to alert

management () or does not meet the need (blank).

Table K: Case Management Product Capabilities—Alert Management

Company name

Alert displays all needed data

Other vendor alerts displayed

Displays check images

Automated alert disposition available

Can create case from alert(s)

Alert decisions improve future detection

Argo

BAE Systems

CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



37

Company name

Alert displays all needed data

Other vendor alerts displayed

Displays check images

Automated alert disposition available

Can create case from alert(s)

Alert decisions improve future detection

Intellinx

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


Enterprises may need to handle a broad array of alert types. Table L shows the types currently

supported by each vendor.

Table L: Case Management Product Capabilities—Alert Types

Alert type

Arg

o

BA

E

Bo

tto

mlin

e

(fo

rme

rly

Inte

llin

x)

Cu

sto

me

rXP

s

Fico

Fise

rv

Jack

He

nry

Lexi

sNe

xis

Ris

k So

luti

on

s

Nic

e A

ctim

ize

Pe

gsys

tem

s

Ton

be

ller

ACH

ATM disputes

Brokerage

Bank Secrecy Act (BSA)/AML

Check

Commercial lending

Compliance (non-AML)

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



38

Alert type

Arg

o

BA

E

Bo

tto

mlin

e

(fo

rme

rly

Inte

llin

x)

Cu

sto

me

rXP

s

Fico

Fise

rv

Jack

He

nry

Lexi

sNe

xis

Ris

k So

luti

on

s

Nic

e A

ctim

ize

Pe

gsys

tem

s

Ton

be

ller

Consumer lending

Data security

Debit, credit, prepaid cards

Insider/ internal

Insurance

Mortgage

Physical security

Custom

Wire


INVESTIGATIONS

One of the key requirements of case management products is that they contain fields for all the

data needed. While this may seem obvious, it is a complaint several bank executives make

concerning products they currently use. For example, there are a number of types of people who

may need to be identified in detail in a case file: the customer(s), the victim(s), and the

suspect(s). All data fields for each of these are necessary for investigations to be adequately

documented.

Another common complaint is that items related to the same case may have to be entered one

at a time, creating a needlessly time-consuming manual task. For example, a counterfeit check

fraud case may involve hundreds of checks; there should be a simple, easy way to move the

details of all these items into a single case. One of the primary complaints heard from FI

executives during the course of this research is that products may work very well for decisioning

alerts but not be very useful in working cases. Indeed, some products don’t support case

investigations at all (e.g., Fico, and LexisNexis) and are limited to alert investigations.

All of the products that handle investigations allow for the creation of manual cases, document

all steps taken during the investigation, and create an audit trail of actions and user

identification. Attachments can be stored in the electronic case file for organization, easy

retrieval, and for sharing with law enforcement agencies. Most of the products allow sharing

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



39

with local, state, and federal law enforcement agencies, but two are limited to filing suspicious

activity reports with regulators. Some products enable cases to be transferred between

departments as needed (Table M).

Table M: Case Management Product Capabilities—Investigations

Company name Share with law enforcement

Allow attachments to case

Transfer cases between departments

Argo

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs Regulatory only

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize

Pegasystems

Tonbeller Regulatory only


Case management products can interface with various bank systems to perform additional

functionality. Examples include refunding a customer’s checking account or credit card when

fraudulent activity has posted and interfacing to the general ledger to balance the refund

transactions. Interfacing to the general ledger also may allow charge-offs and recoveries to be

booked, enabling financial reports that document actual losses and recoveries (Table N).

Table N: Case Management Product Capabilities—System Interfaces

Company name

Direct deposit account

Credit card General ledger

Process charge-offs, recoveries

Produce financial reports

Argo

BAE Systems Custom

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



40

Company name

Direct deposit account

Credit card General ledger

Process charge-offs, recoveries

Produce financial reports


Custom

CustomerXPs Custom

Fico Custom

Fiserv

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize Custom Custom

Pegasystems Custom

Tonbeller Custom


Case management can also create better-quality customer communication by using forms that

standardize language, grammar, and spelling to eliminate errors and produce time savings. Some

products allow all types of communications, while others have limitations as detailed in Table O.

Table O: Case Management Product Capabilities—Customer Communications

Company name Form letters Email Text messages Regulation CC notices

Argo

BAE Systems Custom


Custom

CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv Custom

Jack Henry


Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



41

Company name Form letters Email Text messages Regulation CC notices

Nice Actimize Custom

Pegasystems Custom

Tonbeller


WORKFLOW

There are many workflow processes that can ensure consistency of processes, obtain required

approvals, meet deadlines, and accomplish many other steps. Workflows can help streamline

processes to optimize operational efficiencies while ensuring no key steps are skipped

intentionally or due to lack of training. Table P compares workflow capabilities among vendors

that participated in this evaluation.

Table P: Case Management Product Capabilities—Workflow

Company name Automated alert or case assignment

Escalate to avoid missed deadlines

Management-defined workflows

Audit trail for regulatory filings and acknowledgements

Argo

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



42

A number of deadlines must be complied with in various areas of an enterprise. Many of these

deadlines are required by regulations; Regulation E, for example, requires that a consumer

receive provisional credit for disputed transactions within 10 days of notifying the FI and final

credit within 60 days. Deadlines required by regulations must be complied with. If a pattern of

missing these deadlines is detected, an FI may be fined or written up for noncompliance.

Internal deadlines also exist and must be met. One example of this is the policy limit for charging

off a fraud loss. The deadline may vary from FI to FI, but each FI is responsible for complying with

its internal policy. Workflow processes can help with meeting such deadlines by notifying an

investigator that a deadline is approaching and by escalating to a supervisor or manager if a

deadline is about to be missed. Table Q compares vendor products and the deadlines they can

help an FI meet consistently.

Table Q: Case Management Product Capabilities—Deadline Compliance

Company name Charge-offs SARs Regulation E credits

Regulation CC notices

Argo

BAE Systems Custom Custom


Custom Custom Custom

CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize Custom Custom

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


REPORTING

Again, many FIs are disappointed when the vendor fails to listen carefully to their needs to

create specific reports or when expensive professional services are required to code the reports.

Details on reporting follow in Table R.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



43

Table R: Case Management Product Capabilities—Reporting

Company name Provide standard management reports

Easy dashboard creation

Track and report employee performance metrics

Reports for departmental results and overall divisional results

Argo

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry Custom Custom


Nice Actimize

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


REGULATORY COMPLIANC E

Case management products can help an FI demonstrate compliance with various regulatory

requirements by requiring the same steps be completed consistently and by monitoring that

deadlines are being met. Reminders can be sent when deadlines are approaching to ensure they

are met, and exception reports can be monitored to ensure exceptions are just that and do not

become the norm. Table S details which case management solutions help FIs demonstrate

compliance with U.S. consumer regulations.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



44

Table S: Case Management Product Capabilities—Regulatory Compliance

Company name Demonstrate compliance with Regulation CC holds

Demonstrate compliance with Regulation E reimbursement

Demonstrate compliance with BSA

Demonstrate compliance with filing SARs

Argo CTRs, monetary instruments, Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)

BAE Systems


Custom If configured CTRs, Customer Identification Program (CIP)

CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv CTRs, CIP, customer due diligence (CDD), Enhanced Due Diligence (EDD), monetary instruments, sanctions screening

Jack Henry


KYC, EDD, sanctions screening

Nice Actimize Custom

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


LOSS ANALYSIS

Analyzing losses to determine the root cause is essential to ensuring the best investments are

made for fraud prevention. In addition, quality-control steps can be taken to ensure a prevention

solution’s optimal performance. Often, the first step in analyzing losses is to determine how the

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



45

loss occurred, then what allowed the fraudulent transaction to occur. For example, a loss might

be attributed to an online account takeover, but a call to the contact center to have online

credentials reset enabled the account takeover. Analysis is key to understanding the root cause

of losses.

Next, it is important to determine whether a fraud alert was generated by any prevention system

on the transaction leading to the loss. If an alert was triggered, who worked it, and what

decision was made? If the wrong decision was clearly made, a need for additional training may

be in order. If no alert was triggered, should one have been? What solution should have

triggered it, and why didn’t it? Do parameters need to be adjusted, a new scenario created, or

another step taken to prevent additional losses? This is the type of fact finding essential for loss

analysis. Some providers understand this need and are helping banks meet it using all the data

captured within case management solutions (Table T).

Table T: Case Management Product Capabilities—Loss Analysis

Company name Determine if alert was created

Perform root cause analysis

Create all loss types needed

Capture loss type, root cause, delivery channel

Argo Loss type, delivery channel

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry


None

Nice Actimize

Pegasystems Custom

Tonbeller


Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



46

SYSTEMS

FIs rely on case management systems day in and day out. When system problems do occur, it is

vital that providers assist in addressing those problems quickly. FIs that use systems across

multiple departments also need system administrators to add, delete, and change access for

employees quickly, or inefficiencies will arise. None of the products contain limitations in terms

of the number of users, and all can be set up based on roles that allow access to specific

capabilities. All claim to have easy-to-use system administration capabilities. All can be used by a

number of departments; only LexisNexis has a limitation of one system administrator. This is

generally not a problem in smaller FIs, but larger institutions with many users typically need a

system administrator in each department. This helps ensure users can be added, deleted, or

updated without delays and gives each department control over its own personnel’s access.

Providers were asked about system-related issues regarding case management (Table U).

Table U: Case Management Product Capabilities—System

Company name Archive method is provided

System administration is simple

System administrator for each department

Argo For 3 years

BAE Systems


CustomerXPs

Fico

Fiserv

Jack Henry


Nice Actimize

Pegasystems

Tonbeller


The final comparison between vendors’ systems is related to the infrastructure required to use

the product and its scalability. Each vendor supplied information related to this topic (Table V).

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



47

Table V: Case Management Product—Operational Impact

Company name System scalability, server requirements, retention, etc.

Argo Oasis is designed to scale horizontally and vertically. Multiple application servers can be dedicated and load-balanced to maintain processing service-level agreements (SLAs) with incoming volume. Application servers with multiple processors can be dedicated, as needed, to real-time processing, to maintain incoming volume and SLAs. Hardware sizing is done based on an assessment of the number and types of channels that need to be analyzed.

BAE Systems NetReveal EIM is capable of scaling both vertically and horizontally. Vertical scaling is often done in compliance solutions, with additional volume and data retention, and horizontal scaling in the fraud space, to accommodate real-time processing of incoming data. NetReveal supports native load balancing across Java virtual machines. The product effectively requires a database server and an application server, which may reside on the same or discrete infrastructure. Hardware specifications typically vary depending on the scale of the client implementation. BAE Systems works with the client to determine the appropriate implementation, taking into account the solution being deployed, expected number of users, peak/typical transaction rates, referential data volume, etc.


Clients can configure the retention period for transaction, alert, and case history. At a minimum, transaction history is retained for a rolling 13 months, and case data is retained online for at least 5 years. Many clients retain history for longer periods.

CustomerXPs Clari5 CMS is a highly scalable system that can handle up to 6,700 transactions per second. The system supports horizontal scalability in line with organizational data growth. It uses intel/IBM hardware for managing cases or data of any scale, as it has implemented in some of the world's largest banks.

Fico This is contingent on transaction volume, case volume, tenants, and number of users as well as peak hours. Fico does an extensive sizing exercise for each client per its requirements.

Fiserv The FCRM platform application server and the database server can be scaled independently. As a Web-based application, the FCRM platform is able to work well in a distributed environment, and it can be scaled out across multiple servers that together form a cluster, that is, a group of servers or nodes linked together in such a way that they can be treated as one large system. To make sure the servers work together in an efficient way, load balancing can be used.

The FCRM platform runs on any Windows/Intel chip environment.

Jack Henry Yellow Hammer BSA Software is a client-server application designed in Java that runs on a Windows Server 2003 platform. All data is stored for a minimum of 5 years.

LexisNexis The system is scalable by adding services and servers in an open architecture. The retention of cases is controlled by the client when the system is hosted by a client. There is separation between the production and reporting databases to ensure production performance is maintained.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



48

Company name System scalability, server requirements, retention, etc.

Nice Actimize Scalability is achieved with multiple threads that process different data segments simultaneously. Scalability can be achieved with both:

-Scale-in factor: a single machine processing multiple threads

-Scale-out factor: multiple machines processing multiple threads

In cases where threads must share their state (e.g., sharing a profile), the solution supports the scale-out architecture by utilizing a database to store its profiles. Actimize Risk Case Manager scalability is achieved by using an Active/Active J2EE cluster and a Web load-balancer. Distributed cache and session transfer mechanisms ensure undisturbed user experiences, even in the case of a node failure. This architecture is used for both batch and real-time modes.

Pegasystems Pega differentiates itself as explicitly architected to exploit the JIT (Java Just-in-time compiler) to execute business models in the language of the machine it is running on. Unlike interpreted business process management (BPM), Pega does not execute process via a proprietary interpreter. At runtime, Pega executes a patented process called “Assembly” to dynamically translate processes and business definitions into actual Java. Because the business definitions are executing as Java themselves—rather than inside an interpreter—the JIT is able to reach into the business definitions and optimize them. This means that Pega processes and components will execute directly in the language of the machine they are running on—typically around 20 times faster than an interpreted BPM solution that cannot be optimized. This architectural difference between Pega and interpreted BPM products is the key reason why Pega is the only BPM platform that has been proven to scale to tens of thousands of concurrent users.

Tonbeller There is no known limit to the scalability of the system. The system scales linearly to the hardware and data to be delivered.

The scalability and multiclient capabilities of the solution can be displayed in a reference project: In this project, Siron AML is being hosted from a savings bank data center processing for 430 savings banks, 280 million transactions per day.


Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



49

VENDOR AWARDS

Aite Group is pleased to present a number of awards for outstanding performance. The award

criteria are based on the following factors:

Client feedback

Aite Group’s assessment of the vendor’s capability set, product maturity, and future

development plans

The vendor’s market penetration and experience with enterprise case management

LEADER IN THE NORTH AMERICAN SMALLER F I MARKET (LESS THAN US$10 B IL LION IN ASSETS)

This award goes to Jack Henry, which has built a large base of very happy clients. Jack Henry’s

enterprise case management system is so integrated with fraud prevention and AML, it is

difficult for executives to describe where one ends and another begins. Likewise, the solution is

integrated with core systems, enabling many time-saving processes. Client executives raved

about the electronic files that allow all types of documents to be attached, rendering them

completely paper-free, and the improved internal communications, since multiple people can

access the same alert or case.

LEADER IN L INK ANALYSIS AND VI SUALIZATION

This award goes to BAE Systems, whose link analysis enables investigators to quickly identify

many elements of organized fraud networks. Understanding the relationships between parties

and monitoring all accounts and activities within the network allows improved fraud prevention.

In addition, investigators are able to link losses together in one related case, often meeting

minimum dollar thresholds imposed by law enforcement to accept cases for prosecution.

LEADER IN THE NORTH AMERICAN LARGE F I MA RKET

This award goes to Nice Actimize, which has by far the most implementations in large FIs, and has extremely strong AML and fraud prevention capabilities. Nice Actimize provides strong workflow techniques, which allow FIs to improve operational efficiency and enables FIs to demonstrate compliance with many regulations. Additionally, customer communications can be streamlined using case management, and reporting capabilities are strong.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



50

CONCLUSION

Given the escalating threat volume from all types of financial crimes, it is in financial institutions’ best interests to maximize the potential benefits of enterprise case management. With global demand for this product increasing from FIs of all sizes, vendors can also benefit by ensuring they are consistently considered when FIs look for this functionality. Here are a few recommendations for players in the space:

For solution providers:

Ensure you understand the distinction between alert management and case

investigations. Several providers still do not understand the needs for case

management as differentiated from alert management. Investigators cannot easily

use their products to efficiently populate cases with data. Providers that do

understand this distinction and attempt to meet these needs have a big competitive

advantage when FIs seek enterprise solutions.

Listen to investigative users of your solution to identify gaps. This will enable you to

better meet enterprise needs, leading to more satisfied customers as well as new

ones. If there are a lot of gaps, seek feedback to assist you in prioritizing future

development.

For financial institutions:

Understand all the benefits of an enterprise solution. This can help streamline

department functions, automate processes, demonstrate regulatory compliance,

and improve operational efficiencies in ways you may not yet fully appreciate.

Seeking an enterprise solution and dealing with one primary provider can save

your FI time and money. It also enables information to be shared among

departments easily when needed, potentially improving results for all.

At a minimum, using the same case management product to work both alerts and

financial fraud cases will improve enterprise performance. Helping your provider

understand product gaps will help get them addressed in a future release.

Using case management can assist with regulatory examinations if workflows are

used to your advantage. Reviewing periodic exception reports will increase your

chances for positive audits and examinations.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.



51

RELATED AITE GROUP RESEARCH

Watch-List Filtering Vendor Evaluation: Separating the Wheat From the Chaff, August 2015.

Global AML Vendor Evaluation: Managing Rapidly Escalating Risk, June 2015.

AML: Smaller Financial Institutions in Search of Solutions, August, 2014.

Enterprise Fraud Management: Still Evolving After All These Years, May 2014.

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.

http://aitegroup.com/report/watch-list-filtering-vendor-evaluation-separating-wheat-chaff

http://aitegroup.com/report/global-aml-vendor-evaluation-managing-rapidly-escalating-risk

http://aitegroup.com/report/aml-smaller-financial-institutions-search-solutions

http://aitegroup.com/report/enterprise-fraud-management-still-evolving-after-all-these-years



52

ABOUT AITE GROUP

Aite Group is an independent research and advisory firm focused on business, technology, and

regulatory issues and their impact on the financial services industry. With expertise in banking,

payments, securities & investments, and insurance, Aite Group’s analysts deliver comprehensive,

actionable advice to key market participants in financial services. Headquartered in Boston with

a presence in Chicago, New York, San Francisco, London, and Milan, Aite Group works with its

clients as a partner, advisor, and catalyst, challenging their basic assumptions and ensuring they

remain at the forefront of industry trends.

AUTHOR INFORMATION

Shirley Inscoe +1.617.5050

[email protected]

CONTACT

For more information on research and consulting services, please contact:

Aite Group Sales +1.617.338.6050

[email protected]

For all press and conference inquiries, please contact:

Aite Group PR +44.(0)207.092.8137

[email protected]

For all other inquiries, please contact:

[email protected]

Licen

sed fo

r Extern

al Distrib

utio

n b

y Bo

ttom

line T

echn

olo

gies In

c.

mailto:[email protected]


