Topic starter
24/08/2026 2:01 pm
TL;DR: Authorization rates for a Japanese fashion platform and ST improved by 15% while fraud fell to near zero and manual review was eliminated, showing how selective authentication and risk-based decisions can reduce checkout friction without weakening payment controls, according to Riskified. For identity and fraud teams, the lesson is that authorization, identity intelligence, and transaction risk governance now need to be treated as one operating model.
Editorial analysis by NHI Mgmt Group, based on content published by Riskified: “Japanese fashion platform “and ST“ Co., Ltd. Improves Authorization Rates by 15% and Reduces Fraud with Riskified”.
By the numbers:
- and ST Co., Ltd. increased authorization rates by 15% after working with Riskified for approximately eight months.
- Fraud chargebacks were reduced to approximately 0.0005%, effectively near zero, according to Riskified.
- Manual fraud review was eliminated, saving approximately 10 hours per week.
Key questions
Q: How should ecommerce teams balance fraud prevention with approval rates?
A: Treat fraud prevention as a decision-quality problem, not a blocking problem.
Q: Why do strict authentication controls sometimes increase false declines?
A: Because authentication adds friction and creates more chances for legitimate customers to be challenged or rejected.
Q: What are the signs that ecommerce fraud operations are not scaling well?
A: Common signs include rising manual review queues, falling approval rates, and persistent friction at checkout even when fraud loss appears controlled.
Practitioner guidance
- Implement risk-based 3DS challenge policies Use transaction and identity signals to exempt low-risk payments from unnecessary step-up authentication while preserving verification for suspicious activity.
- Unify account and payment risk scoring Combine login, account creation, device, and transaction signals into one decision workflow so fraud controls can evaluate the whole customer journey.
- Measure false declines alongside fraud loss Track approval rate, chargeback rate, and manual review volume together so a fraud control does not look effective while harming conversion.
Bottom line: The core problem is not a lack of payment authentication, but using it too broadly and creating avoidable friction for legitimate customers.
Explore further
View Full Forum → | NHI Foundation Course → | Our Services → | Read the full analysis →
24/08/2026 2:01 pm
Selective authentication is becoming the real control plane for ecommerce fraud. The article shows that authentication itself is not the issue. The issue is whether authentication is applied with enough discrimination to preserve conversion while still containing fraud. For identity and fraud teams, this is a governance problem, not just a tuning exercise, because it links identity confidence to payment outcome.
A few things that frame the scale:
- U.S. fraud losses are projected to reach $40 billion by 2027.
A question worth separating out:
Q: What should teams do when payment authentication and fraud operations are managed separately?
A: Bring them under one governance model and align policy ownership across fraud, identity, and payments teams. Separate ownership often creates conflicting incentives, such as higher security friction or higher conversion at the expense of control quality. A unified model lets teams tune customer experience without weakening fraud prevention.
👉 Read our full editorial: Fraud controls and authorization rates in ecommerce payments