Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

iDenfy vs Sardine

iDenfy logo

iDenfy

Cybersecurity

Identity verification and AML screening bundled into a single per-verification price

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Sardine logo

Sardine

Cybersecurity

Device intelligence and behaviour biometrics for fraud and compliance

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: iDenfy rates are quoted rather than published on an accessible page, so despite the marketing emphasis on transparency you still need a sales conversation to get a number.; Sardine signal quality depends on the SDK being embedded in your own web and mobile clients, so fraud improvements become dependent on your app release cycle and any coverage gap is a blind spot.
  • They diverge on capability: iDenfy covers Document verification, Sardine covers Device intelligence.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which iDenfy and Sardine actually diverge.

Attributes where iDenfy and Sardine differ
AttributeiDenfySardine
Pricing modelPer verificationquote
PlatformsWeb, iOS, Android, APIWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: starting price (On request), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in iDenfy

  • Document verification
  • Human review on all cases
  • AML screening
  • Business verification
  • Proof of address
  • NFC chip reading

Only in Sardine

  • Device intelligence
  • Behaviour biometrics
  • Scam detection
  • Onboarding risk scoring
  • AML transaction monitoring
  • Dispute and chargeback handling
  • Rules editor

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

iDenfy

  • A European fintech that needs KYC and AML screening and wants one price rather than four line itemsnot Sardine
  • A gambling operator in a regulated EU market needing age and identity assurance with EU data processingnot Sardine
  • A crypto platform with modest volume that cannot meet the minimum commitments larger vendors requirenot Sardine
  • A marketplace wanting NFC passport chip reading for higher assurance without an enterprise contractnot Sardine

Sardine

  • A neobank losing money to authorised push payment scams where the customer genuinely approved the transfernot iDenfy
  • A crypto exchange trying to detect accounts being operated by remote access rather than by their ownernot iDenfy
  • A fintech seeing synthetic identity signups that pass document verification but share device characteristicsnot iDenfy
  • A lender wanting first party fraud signals at application time that a credit bureau file does not containnot iDenfy

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

iDenfy

  • Rates are quoted rather than published on an accessible page, so despite the marketing emphasis on transparency you still need a sales conversation to get a number.
  • It is a smaller vendor than the market leaders, which makes it a harder sell through enterprise vendor-risk review even when the product performs well.
  • Human review on every case caps throughput in a way fully automated competitors are not constrained by, which shows up as latency during volume spikes.
  • Coverage and accuracy are strongest on European documents; performance on some Asian, African and Latin American document types trails specialists in those regions.
  • The bundled AML screening uses its chosen data sources, so institutions mandated to use a specific list provider such as Dow Jones cannot substitute it and end up paying twice.

Sardine

  • Signal quality depends on the SDK being embedded in your own web and mobile clients, so fraud improvements become dependent on your app release cycle and any coverage gap is a blind spot.
  • Behavioural and device telemetry collection needs a documented lawful basis under GDPR, and EU privacy reviews frequently delay rollouts that were scoped as engineering work.
  • Pricing is per session or per active user, so a consumer product with many low value sessions pays in proportion to traffic rather than to fraud exposure.
  • As a younger private company it lacks the enforcement-tested audit history that a bank examiner expects, which makes it a harder sell inside a regulated bank than inside a fintech.
  • It is strongest on session-time signals and weaker as a system of record for long horizon AML typologies, so larger institutions end up running it alongside a traditional monitoring platform rather than instead of one.

Pricing, plan by plan

iDenfy

On request
  • iDenfy Verification$undefined/verification
    • Volume-tiered per-verification rates quoted on request
    • AML screening bundled rather than charged per check
    • No monthly minimum advertised

Sardine

On request
  • Sardine$undefined/year
    • Priced per user session or per monthly active user
    • Annual contract with volume commitment
    • SDK for web, iOS and Android

Which should you pick?

Choose iDenfy if

  • You need document verification.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android, API.
  • You also want human review on all cases.
iDenfy review

Choose Sardine if

  • You need device intelligence.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want behaviour biometrics.
Sardine review

Questions people ask

Is iDenfy or Sardine better?
Neither clearly leads. iDenfy starts at On request and Sardine at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, iDenfy or Sardine?
iDenfy starts at On request and Sardine at On request.
Does iDenfy or Sardine run on more platforms?
iDenfy runs on Web, iOS, Android, API. Sardine runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is iDenfy best used for?
iDenfy is most often used for a european fintech that needs kyc and aml screening and wants one price rather than four line items, a gambling operator in a regulated eu market needing age and identity assurance with eu data processing, a crypto platform with modest volume that cannot meet the minimum commitments larger vendors require, a marketplace wanting nfc passport chip reading for higher assurance without an enterprise contract. Of those, a european fintech that needs kyc and aml screening and wants one price rather than four line items and a gambling operator in a regulated eu market needing age and identity assurance with eu data processing are not what Sardine is typically brought in for.
What can iDenfy do that Sardine cannot?
iDenfy covers Document verification, Human review on all cases, AML screening, Business verification. Sardine covers Device intelligence, Behaviour biometrics, Scam detection, Onboarding risk scoring.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

iDenfy: Is AML screening included in the verification price?

That is the pitch, screening bundled rather than sold as a per-check add-on. Confirm which sanctions and PEP data sources are behind it before you rely on it.

Sardine: Does Sardine do document verification?

It focuses on device, behavioural and transaction signals, and integrates identity verification providers rather than being one. Treat it as complementary to a KYC vendor.

iDenfy: Is there a monthly minimum?

iDenfy markets itself as having no monthly minimum, in contrast to competitors charging $49 to $299 a month. Get that in writing in the contract.

Sardine: What does it need from us to work?

An SDK in your web and mobile applications plus transaction feeds. Without the client side collector you lose the signals that differentiate it.

iDenfy: Where is data processed?

iDenfy is established in Lithuania and processes in the EU, which simplifies GDPR transfer assessments compared with United States-headquartered vendors.

Sardine: Is pricing published?

No. It is quoted, typically per session or per monthly active user with an annual volume commitment.

Share

Related pages

More on iDenfy

More on Sardine

Keep looking

Other head to heads