Detect Fraud Faster With a Transaction Graph
Financial Crime is Getting Harder to Uncover A few small purchases— a familiar ride-hailing service charge, maybe a food delivery here and there. Each of these transactions clears your fraud detection pipeline with no issue. The cardholder’s behavior seems normal until… Read more →
Financial Crime is Getting Harder to Uncover
A few small purchases— a familiar ride-hailing service charge, maybe a food delivery here and there. Each of these transactions clears your fraud detection pipeline with no issue. The cardholder’s behavior seems normal until you realize the same device fingerprint appears on 30 different accounts, each using different names, addresses, and cards.
Sophisticated and fast-moving, modern financial crime doesn’t break obvious rules— it slips through the gaps between them. Fraud rings operate across networks of accounts, merchants, and devices, and often use AI tools that make synthetic identities harder to detect. These tactics are evasive and difficult to spot in a timely fashion, especially in digital payments and real-time banking, where decisions must be made in milliseconds. Detection pipelines have to keep up, but most aren’t built for that level of speed or complexity.
Most fraud tools are designed to evaluate transactions in isolation, which makes it hard to detect coordinated fraud across accounts, devices, and merchants. They struggle with complex fraud patterns that are difficult to see using static rules and scattered, siloed data. This leads to false positive rates as high as 95 percent, overwhelming fraud teams and slowing responses. The cost of that inefficiency adds up quickly. In 2025, U.S. businesses reported losing nearly 10 percent of their revenue to fraud, much of it compounded by operational overhead from manual reviews and delayed investigations.
Traditional Tools Create Fraud Blind Spots
At the data layer, most fraud tools depend on relational databases. By design, these databases store each transaction as an individual row, which fragments activity across accounts, devices, and identities. Following a trail of related behavior requires stitching data together through complex, JOIN-heavy queries that are slow to run and difficult to maintain as fraud tactics change. As a result, teams have low visibility and struggle to see coordinated activity across entities.
Machine learning can help, but it can’t fully compensate for this lack of connected context. Models trained on historical patterns struggle to recognize new fraud schemes, especially when the underlying data obscures relationships. Even well-tuned models miss the full story when the data is fragmented.
The same problem shows up in rules-based detection. These tools rely on flags like unusual locations and transaction amounts or mismatched IPs, but they evaluate these signals in isolation. Without understanding how accounts, devices, and transactions connect, alerts fire too broadly. Activity that looks suspicious on its own may be perfectly normal in context, driving false positive rates sky-high and overwhelming fraud teams. False positives and false negatives often come from the same root cause: disconnected data that lacks the structure needed to reveal coordinated behavior. To stay ahead, teams need to see past individual transactions to the network of connections behind them and understand the context those connections reveal.
From Isolated Records to a Connected Model of Risk
Real-time fraud detection depends on having a clear view of how transactions behave across your business. A graph database stores the relationships between entities. When you model your transaction data as a knowledge graph, it becomes a Transaction Graph: a living, flexible model that connects transactions to the accounts, customers, devices, merchants, and behaviors behind them, giving teams a connected view of how risk moves through the environment.
More than just linking data from different sources, a Transaction Graph surfaces relationships that provide context, helping teams understand why activity looks risky and where to focus attention before losses escalate.
A graph that represents real-world data points, entities, and their relationships
Relationships are built into the graph structure so teams can explore behavior across multiple hops without complex queries or schema changes. And there’s no need to overhaul your current setup because the graph works alongside existing rules engines, models, and case management tools. A graph-based approach complements existing systems by surfacing hidden context in real time, improving detection without disrupting what already works.
When teams can follow risk as it develops and adapt as tactics evolve, they can respond faster and with greater precision. Investigations move more quickly to catch fraud earlier, and legitimate customers are less likely to be delayed or flagged in error. That leads to stronger performance across both fraud and compliance programs without compromising the customer experience.
Fraud Detection Accelerated
Learn how graph databases strengthen your fraud detection solution and help you stay ahead of evolving threats.
Graph-Powered Fraud Detection in Action
For real-time payments provider iuvity, fraud detection had to happen in milliseconds so that customer experience isn’t negatively impacted— even slight delays can frustrate customers and erode trust. But as transaction volumes grew, so did the complexity of fraud attempts and the limits of traditional tools.
To meet that challenge, iuvity used a Transaction Graph to build its risk assessment engine, iuviPROFILER. The system continuously maps how accounts, devices, and transactions are connected, spanning more than 250 million nodes and 2.2 billion relationships. It handles hundreds of transactions per second, with most queries completing in just tenths of a millisecond.
By combining pattern matching, anomaly detection, and machine learning using the structure of the graph, iuvity doubled its fraud detection rate without increasing false positives. The system protects billions of transactions annually while keeping friction low for legitimate users and helps prevent more than $40 million in fraud losses each year. Because the graph model is flexible, the team can add new inputs or evolve detection strategies without taking systems offline or rewriting the core model. The solution also supports seamless cloud deployment, allowing the team to scale as needed without added complexity.
Key Outcomes From iuvity’s Graph Approach
Scale: 250M+ nodes, 2.2B+ relationshipsSpeed: ~500 transactions per second with sub-millisecond query timesImpact: 2x increase in fraud detection with no rise in false positivesBusiness outcome: $40M+ in fraud losses prevented annuallyFlexibility: No downtime required to add new signals or evolve the model
While iuvity focused on payment fraud, the same approach applies to other financial crime use cases. A Transaction Graph makes it possible to trace multi-hop connections in money laundering investigations, spot shared patterns in staged insurance claims, surface device reuse in account takeovers, or flag risky behaviors in credit applications. Wherever data is connected, a Transaction Graph helps teams follow the trail of risk in real time.
Expand Visibility Across Your Enterprise
A Transaction Graph gives fraud teams the ability to trace the behaviors and relationships behind suspicious activity, but that’s just one piece of a larger data strategy. You can extend the same graph-based approach across your organization using core enterprise graphs that reflect how people, systems, and resources connect:
-
Customer Graph: Maps relationships across interactions, preferences, and journeys
-
Transaction Graph: Reveals patterns in financial flows and payment relationships
-
Employee Graph: Captures skills, roles, and institutional knowledge
-
Product Graph: Connects offerings, components, and dependencies
-
Process Graph: Visualizes operational workflows and business logic
-
Network and Security Graph: Monitors systems, access patterns, and risk exposure
-
Supplier Graph: Links vendors, materials, and resources across your supply chain
Together, these enterprise graphs provide a clearer and more comprehensive view of your business. Teams can see how one decision affects another, even across departments, making it easier to spot risks and prioritize actions. And because the model adapts as your business (and data) grows, it helps you stay ready for whatever comes next.
Each business domain— customer, product, supplier, process, and beyond— connects through shared data relationships to reflect how value flows across the enterprise.
Act Faster With Connected Fraud Detection
A Transaction Graph gives fraud teams the visibility they need to spot threats as they emerge, providing insight that helps reduce false positives to stop fraud earlier and speed up investigations without interfering with valid activity.
Built to adapt, a Transaction Graph gives you a flexible foundation that evolves as fraud does. As tactics shift, teams can introduce new indicators and adjust strategies to improve their current approach and stay prepared for new fraud scenarios.
Learn more about how a Transaction Graph can help strengthen fraud detection:
-
Exploring Fraud Detection With Neo4j & Graph Data Science
-
Detecting Bank Fraud With Neo4j: The Power of Graph Databases
-
Elevate Fraud Detection With Neo4j on AWS: Uncover Hidden Patterns and Enhance Accuracy
-
Mastering Fraud Detection With Temporal Graph Modeling
Fraud Detection Accelerated
Learn how graph databases strengthen your fraud detection solution and help you stay ahead of evolving threats.
Sign in to highlight and annotate this article

Conversation starters
Daily AI Digest
Get the top 5 AI stories delivered to your inbox every morning.
More about
serviceGenerative AI in Action: Field Experimental Evidence from Alibaba's Customer Service Operations
arXiv:2603.29888v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In collaboration with Alibaba, this study leverages a large-scale field experiment to assess the impact of a generative AI assistant on worker performance in e-commerce after-sales service. Human agents providing digital chat support were randomly assigned with access to a gen AI assistant that offered two core functions: diagnosis of customer issues and solution proposals, presented as text messages. Agents retained discretion to adopt, modify, or disregard AI-generated messages. To evaluate gen AI's impact, we estimate both the intention-to-treat (ITT) effect of gen AI access and the local average treatment effect (LATE) of gen AI usage. Results show that gen AI significantly improved service speed, measured by issue identification time and
CivicShield: A Cross-Domain Defense-in-Depth Framework for Securing Government-Facing AI Chatbots Against Multi-Turn Adversarial Attacks
arXiv:2603.29062v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLM-based chatbots in government services face critical security gaps. Multi-turn adversarial attacks achieve over 90% success against current defenses, and single-layer guardrails are bypassed with similar rates. We present CivicShield, a cross-domain defense-in-depth framework for government-facing AI chatbots. Drawing on network security, formal verification, biological immune systems, aviation safety, and zero-trust cryptography, CivicShield introduces seven defense layers: (1) zero-trust foundation with capability-based access control, (2) perimeter input validation, (3) semantic firewall with intent classification, (4) conversation state machine with safety invariants, (5) behavioral anomaly detection, (6) multi-model consensus verifica
Mars Inc. (the chocolate story)
M&M’s, Snickers, Milky Way, Double Mint, Ben’s Rice, Pedigree, Whiskas, VCA, Banfield… all the brands you know, owned by the company you know nothing about: Mars, Incorporated. And Mars itself is 100% owned and deeply intertwined with the Mars family, who are currently the second wealthiest (and perhaps first most secretive!) family in the United States. Tune in for one of the 20th century’s most incredible entrepreneurial stories across candy and pet care, and one that’s all the more incredible because it’s so little-known! Sponsors: WorkOS: https://bit.ly/workos25 Intapp: https://bit.ly/acquiredintapp Sentry: https://bit.ly/acquiredsentry Anthropic: https://bit.ly/acquiredclaude25 Links: Hershey’s M&M response: Hershey-ets Our past episodes on Berkshire Hathaway , LVMH , and Novo Nordisk
Knowledge Map
Connected Articles — Knowledge Graph
This article is connected to other articles through shared AI topics and tags.
More in Products
Active Inference with People: a general approach to real-time adaptive experiments
arXiv:2603.29003v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Adaptive experiments automatically optimize their design throughout the data collection process, which can bring substantial benefits compared to conventional experimental settings. Potential applications include, among others: computerized adaptive testing (for selecting informative tasks in ability measurements), adaptive treatment assignment (when searching experimental conditions maximizing certain outcomes), and active learning (for choosing optimal training data for machine learning algorithms). However, implementing these techniques in real time poses substantial computational and technical challenges. Additionally, despite their conceptual similarity, the above scenarios are often treated as separate problems with distinct solutions
Machine Learning in the Wild: Early Evidence of Non-Compliant ML-Automation in Open-Source Software
arXiv:2603.29698v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The increasing availability of Machine Learning (ML) models, particularly foundation models, enables their use across a range of downstream applications, from scenarios with missing data to safety-critical contexts. This, in principle, may contravene not only the models' terms of use, but also governmental principles and regulations. This paper presents a preliminary investigation into the use of ML models by 173 open-source projects on GitHub, spanning 16 application domains. We evaluate whether models are used to make decisions, the scope of these decisions, and whether any post-processing measures are taken to reduce the risks inherent in fully autonomous systems. Lastly, we investigate the models' compliance with established terms of use.
Deep Learning-Assisted Improved Differential Fault Attacks on Lightweight Stream Ciphers
arXiv:2603.29382v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Lightweight cryptographic primitives are widely deployed in resource-constraint environment, particularly in the Internet of Things (IoT) devices. Due to their public accessibility, these devices are vulnerable to physical attacks, especially fault attacks. Recently, deep learning-based cryptanalytic techniques have demonstrated promising results; however, their application to fault attacks remains limited, particularly for stream ciphers. In this work, we investigate the feasibility of deep learning assisted differential fault attack on three lightweight stream ciphers, namely ACORNv3, MORUSv2 and ATOM, under a relaxed fault model, where a single-bit bit-flipping fault is injected at an unknown location. We train multilayer perceptron (MLP)
Uncovering Relationships between Android Developers, User Privacy, and Developer Willingness to Reduce Fingerprinting Risks
arXiv:2603.29063v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The major mobile platforms, Android and iOS, have introduced changes that restrict user tracking to improve user privacy, yet apps continue to covertly track users via device fingerprinting. We study the opportunity to improve this dynamic with a case study on mobile fingerprinting that evaluates developers' perceptions of how well platforms protect user privacy and how developers perceive platform privacy interventions. Specifically, we study developers' willingness to make changes to protect users from fingerprinting and how developers consider trade-offs between user privacy and developer effort. We do this via a survey of 246 Android developers, presented with a hypothetical Android change that protects users from fingerprinting at the co

Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion
No comments yet — be the first to share your thoughts!