December 6, 2017 By Derek Brink 2 min read

Heading into the holiday season, the National Retail Federation (NRF) predicted that retail sales would be up and that, for the first time, the internet would be the most popular consumer shopping destination.

For online merchants, this is good news. At the same time, it highlights the corresponding Santa Claus problem that online retailers have to deal with: figuring out whether a given online transaction is naughty or nice (i.e., fraudulent or legitimate) quickly and effectively.

Balancing Three Business Objectives

At a high level, the total cost of e-commerce fraud reflects how online merchants are currently deciding to balance three fundamental business objectives.

1. Maximize the Nice

Online merchants naturally want to accept all genuine online orders. Declines are transactions that they don’t accept due to suspicion of fraud, but some of these transactions may actually be legitimate. These are called false declines, which can result in lost revenues.

2. Minimize the Naughty

At the same time, online merchants want to minimize online orders that should not be accepted in the first place. Transactions that are initially accepted but subsequently disputed are known as chargebacks, which can result in reversal of revenue, fees from payment card processors and other costs.

3. Make Better, Faster, More Cost-Effective Decisions

Making better business decisions about e-commerce fraud involves both people and technology. The timeliness of making these decisions is also crucial because customers are typically intolerant of even a few seconds of delay in the online experience. Should this happen, they are likely to take their business to another, speedier retailer.

For online merchants, finding the optimal balance of these three objectives can be tricky. This is the corresponding Goldilocks problem of e-commerce: creating acceptance policies that are neither too strict (leading to false declines) nor too liberal (leading to chargebacks), but just right, while still making transaction-by-transaction decisions in a timely and cost-effective manner.

How Online Merchants Are Performing

Primary research from Aberdeen across eight market segments provided some interesting quantitative insights into how online merchants’ current performance may be out of balance.

  • Maximizing the nice: Declines ranged between 2.5 percent and 5.14 percent of annual online order dollars. However, online merchants are currently turning away between 11 and 100 times more order dollars due to concerns about potential fraud than they are actually losing on chargebacks.
  • Minimizing the naughty: Chargebacks ranged between just four and 46 basis points (a basis point is defined as 1 percent of 1 percent) of annual online order dollars. But online merchants are currently spending between 31 and 167 basis points (between 2.3 and 13.9 times more) on making decisions about fraud than they are actually losing on chargebacks.
  • Making better, faster, cost-effective decisions: For every dollar in overall industry profitability over the last five quarters, which ranged between 7.98 percent and 10.43 percent, the combined business impact of declines, chargebacks and decision-making was between 45 and 60 cents.

For merchants who focus primarily on minimizing chargebacks, this analysis shows why the total cost of e-commerce fraud is actually much worse than they think. The numbers suggest that retailers are missing out on too much of the nice by focusing too much on the naughty. Making better and faster decisions to minimize the impact of false declines represents a big opportunity to reduce the total cost of fraud and improve the bottom line. That’s why effective fraud protection tools should be at the top of every online merchant’s wish list this holiday season.

Download the complete IBM X-Force report: Security Trends in the Retail Industry

More from Fraud Protection

PixPirate: The Brazilian financial malware you can’t see

10 min read - Malicious software always aims to stay hidden, making itself invisible so the victims can’t detect it. The constantly mutating PixPirate malware has taken that strategy to a new extreme. PixPirate is a sophisticated financial remote access trojan (RAT) malware that heavily utilizes anti-research techniques. This malware’s infection vector is based on two malicious apps: a downloader and a droppee. Operating together, these two apps communicate with each other to execute the fraud. So far, IBM Trusteer researchers have observed this…

New Fakext malware targets Latin American banks

6 min read - This article was made possible thanks to contributions from Itzhak Chimino, Michael Gal and Liran Tiebloom. Browser extensions have become integral to our online experience. From productivity tools to entertainment add-ons, these small software modules offer customized features to suit individual preferences. Unfortunately, extensions can prove useful to malicious actors as well. Capitalizing on the favorable characteristics of an add-on, an attacker can leverage attributes like persistence, seamless installation, elevated privileges and unencrypted data exposure to distribute and operate banking…

From federation to fabric: IAM’s evolution

15 min read - In the modern day, we’ve come to expect that our various applications can share our identity information with one another. Most of our core systems federate seamlessly and bi-directionally. This means that you can quite easily register and log in to a given service with the user account from another service or even invert that process (technically possible, not always advisable). But what is the next step in our evolution towards greater interoperability between our applications, services and systems?Identity and…

Topic updates

Get email updates and stay ahead of the latest threats to the security landscape, thought leadership and research.
Subscribe today