Fraud Protection That Can Lower Your Costs, Not Just Your Risk

No — AVS, CVV verification, and tokenization are built into standard processing rather than sold as a separate line item. Better-verified transactions can also qualify for improved interchange rates, which can offset costs elsewhere.

Interchange qualification is partly based on how well a transaction is verified. Transactions with clean AVS and CVV matches tend to qualify for better interchange categories than unverified ones, which can meaningfully affect your effective rate over time.

AVS checks that the billing address entered matches what the card issuer has on file. CVV verification confirms the 3- or 4-digit security code, which is meant to prove the physical card is in the customer's possession. Both catch different types of mismatches.

No — these checks happen automatically during authorization, which typically completes in one to two seconds, the same as a standard transaction without screening.

Yes, within reason — screening sensitivity can be tuned based on your business type and risk tolerance, since overly aggressive settings can cause false declines on legitimate customers.

You'll be notified with the specific reason code and a response window, typically one to two weeks. We help you build evidence targeted to that exact reason, rather than a generic response that's less likely to succeed.

No — some chargebacks stem from actual fraud unrelated to anything you did, and a portion (sometimes called "friendly fraud") comes from customers disputing legitimate charges. Screening reduces your rate substantially but doesn't eliminate it entirely.

Yes — processors and card networks monitor chargeback ratios, and merchants above certain thresholds can face increased fees or additional monitoring. Keeping your rate low protects both revenue and your standing with your processor.

Evidence targeted to the specific reason code — delivery confirmation for "not received" disputes, signed authorization for recurring billing disputes, AVS/CVV match data for unauthorized-transaction claims. Generic responses rarely succeed.

It depends on the situation. If the claim looks clearly valid, a refund is often simpler and avoids a chargeback fee. If you have strong evidence the charge was legitimate, disputing it can be worthwhile, particularly for higher-value transactions.

Yes — AVS, CVV verification, and tokenization are part of standard processing, not an opt-in feature you have to request separately.

Tokenization replaces the actual card number with a randomly generated substitute immediately after capture. The token is useless to anyone who intercepts it, since it can't be reverse-engineered back into the real card number.

Yes — tokenization in particular reduces your PCI compliance scope, since your own systems never store raw card data. That's a meaningful piece of your overall compliance picture.

You'll have a named point of contact on your account team who can investigate the specific transaction directly, rather than a general support queue.

Yes — your account dashboard shows flagged, declined, and disputed transactions so you can review patterns over time rather than reacting to each one individually.