According to the Report on the state of fraud in Spain 2021-2022, carried out by the Spanish Association of Companies Against Fraud (AEECF), 53% of participating financial institutions confirm an increase in fraud compared to the previous year. This was reported to Cointelegraph in Spanish through a statement.
This figure represents an increase in the perception of fraud of 15% compared to the figure recorded in 2020. In addition, 40% of those surveyed declare that the average amount of fraud has increased compared to the previous year.
The AEECF report collected the economic impact of fraud and 40% of those surveyed declared greater losses than the previous year:
33% declare losses of more than one million euros.
27% declare losses of up to 300,000 euros.
40% declare losses of between 100,000 and 300,000 euros.
Teams dedicated to fraud, but with few resources
Financial entities are aware of the importance of risk prevention and monitoring. Little by little, an evolution is registered with the constitution of teams dedicated to this activity, despite the fact that resources are still limited. It is worth highlighting the creation of exclusively anti-fraud teams, leaving behind the risk, operations or financial departments.
César Gilmartín, technical director of the AEECF commented: “Every year, companies are more aware of the fight against fraud, protection and the critical importance of collaboration between credit institutions”.
Almost 50% of those surveyed comment that the teams dedicated to the analysis and monitoring of fraud cases do not exceed 5 people in most cases, while only 13% say they have teams of more than 20 people, in specifically in the large banking and telecommunications sectors.
On the other hand, for fraud experts it is difficult to define a profile of the fraudster, in fact, 73% declare that fraud affects any age and 33% stated that it occurs in all work situations. There is also disappointment throughout Spain, although it is true that 40% of those surveyed indicate Catalonia as the main focus of fraud, followed by Madrid, Valencia and Andalusia.
Tools to combat fraud
Before this panorama, technological solutions are presented as the protagonists in the prevention of fraudincreasingly technological and with a social engineering more elaborate behind.
However, the study carried out by the AEECF says that the tools preferred by fraud experts are not the ones they use on a daily basis in their fight against this problem.
The initiative most used by financial companies (100%) is the consultation of internal databases; followed by validation of identification document (86%); external databases (80%); the analysis or verification of the device (73%); shared fraud databases (53%) andfinally, identity verification or proof of life they are only used by 47%.
Although fraud analysts use the most traditional tools, the ones they value the most are those related to digital channels and which are not yet as widely implemented in digital entities as those related to physical and behavioral biometrics (8.6/10), with device analysis (8.2/10)tests of life and internal bases (8.1/10) and shared bases (8/10).
The shared databases, such as the Hunter file promoted by the AEECF, have data from different financial credit institutions to prevent fraud in applications, exclusively for the purpose of detecting the existence of potentially fraudulent information within the study and approval process. from service.
Difficulties in the day-to-day fight against fraud
40% of those surveyed for the report highlight that the main problem with the tools is the lack of automation, which means constant review by a manager. 20% point to false positives as a difficulty, while 13% highlight the lack of data sharing (local or isolated solutions) as their main problem in their fight against fraud.
Another of the difficulties, pointed out by 13%, is the difficulty of the project to implement the new tool aimed at fighting fraud.
Cesar Gilmartin said: “Fraud experts, although in recent years they have seen how specific departments have been created for their work, are aware that they still do not have the desired size or resources. The same happens with the tools that they use in their day to day, they need automated tools, that feed on shared databases, that eliminate false positives and that start-up and implementation are simple.”.
Disclaimer: The information and/or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views or editorial line of Cointelegraph. The information set forth herein should not be taken as financial advice or investment recommendation. All investment and commercial movement involve risks and it is the responsibility of each person to do their due research before making an investment decision.
It may interest you:
Investments in crypto assets are not regulated. They may not be suitable for retail investors and the full amount invested may be lost. The services or products offered are not aimed at or accessible to investors in Spain.