n a context where regulation demands more traceability than ever, organizations face a strategic decision: unify capabilities within a suite or rely on specialized best-of-breed solutions.
Gartner, across several of its recent Market Guides on fraud and AML, confirms a clear trend: institutions are seeking to reduce the number of vendors to simplify architectures, improve integration, and accelerate audits.
This consolidation does not always happen at the same level. In suites with an IDV-level abstraction, unification focuses on identity verification products and technology (onboarding, authentication, biometrics). By contrast, when the focus is Financial Crime, the suite brings together distinct functional domains—KYC, account classification, fraud signals, and AML—along with their technology layer and the data sources required for each.
In parallel, technical decision-makers continue to value best-of-breed solutions in very specific critical areas, such as PAD L2, behavioral biometrics, or advanced transaction analysis, where technical depth remains a key differentiator.
So, which approach makes sense in each case?
What Is a Suite and What Is Best-of-Breed?
Integrated suite:
Unifies critical capabilities across the financial crime prevention lifecycle—KYC/KYB, authentication, account classification, fraud signals, and AML—within a single platform. It combines product, technology, and data sources under a common governance model, enabling end-to-end signal correlation, reduced technical and operational friction, and traceable evidence ready for audit.
Best-of-breed:
Highly specialized solutions focused on a specific financial crime domain or a critical component of the stack—for example, PAD L2 within KYC, behavioral biometrics for ATO, account classification engines, or dedicated AML modules. They deliver deep technical excellence in that area but require additional integrations, data flow coordination, and greater operational governance effort.
Practical Advantages of Each Approach
When a Suite Is the Better Choice
Highly regulated environments and demanding audits
In markets such as the UAE, KSA, Canada, or Colombia, where regulations require full journey traceability, a suite eliminates blind spots. Correlation across onboarding, authentication, post-login, and transactional signals is immediate, and audits are simpler thanks to centralized evidence.
Need for “less friction, more control”
Gartner notes that institutions are prioritizing vendors that reduce false positives without sacrificing conversion. Suites enable dynamic step-up authentication and unified risk policies, reducing abandonment and OPEX.
Limited technical teams
One roadmap, one SLA, one operational dashboard. Maintenance and regulatory evolution require far less effort than coordinating multiple vendors.
Scalability and time-to-value
When going live in weeks or replicating a model across multiple countries is required, a suite accelerates delivery by already integrating KYC, fraud signals, and AML without additional development.
When Best-of-Breed Is the Better Choice
Need for extreme precision in a critical module
For example, banks looking for a market-leading provider solely for PAD L2 or behavioral biometrics. In these cases, a specialized component can provide a clear advantage.
Very early stages of the technology journey
Fintechs or scale-ups that only need a single component to validate their model (e.g., document verification without full orchestration).
Highly modular architectures or mandatory local integrators
In markets with specific requirements (Nigeria with NIN, Pakistan with NADRA), a local best-of-breed provider can be essential as the documentary source of truth.
The Real Dilemma: Integration, Risk, and Data Coherence
When KYC/onboarding, authentication, fraud detection, and behavioral signals live in different vendors, three structural risks emerge:
- Correlation lag: advanced attacks (deepfakes, synthetic identities, mule accounts) require real-time correlation.
- Higher false positives: disconnected systems generate inconsistent alerts.
- Slower audits: more sources mean more friction and greater regulatory complexity.
As a result, Gartner observes that the market is evolving toward vendors acting as risk hubs, natively integrating identity, fraud, and compliance.
The current market direction shows banks, fintechs, and payment providers moving toward end-to-end models. They are looking for:
- Fewer vendors = lower operational risk.
- No-code orchestration to adjust policies by country without lengthy projects.
- Multibiometrics and unified signals to stop mule accounts, ATO, and synthetic fraud before losses occur.
- Compliance by design to accelerate audits and avoid sanctions.
So, What’s the Right Decision?
There is no universal answer—but there is a clear compass:
- If your priority is controlling fraud, reducing friction, and meeting regulatory requirements across multiple countries: suite.
- If you need maximum specialization at a specific point in the journey: best-of-breed.
The global trend, especially in highly regulated markets, is moving toward unified models capable of delivering identity, fraud prevention, and compliance within a single platform, with explainable AI and audit-ready evidence.
Fraud does not operate in silos: attackers systematically share techniques, infrastructure, and learnings. Defense, therefore, must be built on collective intelligence, where signals, models, and evidence are correlated beyond isolated products or functional domains.
In this context, the concept of a “silo” is no longer purely technological; it depends on the level of abstraction at which risk is addressed—product, suite, institution, or even ecosystem. The more fragmented the intelligence, the greater the attacker’s advantage.