Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Sardine vs Unit21

Sardine logo

Sardine

Cybersecurity

Device intelligence and behaviour biometrics for fraud and compliance

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Unit21 logo

Unit21

Cybersecurity

No-code fraud and AML risk operations platform for fintechs and neobanks

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: 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.; Unit21 it is built for fintech scale rather than card issuer scale, so organisations reaching very high transaction volumes generally re-evaluate against heavier platforms and face a migration.
  • They diverge on capability: Sardine covers Device intelligence, Unit21 covers No-code rule builder.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Sardine and Unit21 actually diverge.

Attributes where Sardine and Unit21 differ
AttributeSardineUnit21
PlatformsWeb, iOS, AndroidWeb

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), 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 Sardine

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

Only in Unit21

  • No-code rule builder
  • Case management
  • SAR filing
  • Backtesting
  • Identity and device signals
  • Data ingestion API

What people use each for

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

Sardine

  • A neobank losing money to authorised push payment scams where the customer genuinely approved the transfernot Unit21
  • A crypto exchange trying to detect accounts being operated by remote access rather than by their ownernot Unit21
  • A fintech seeing synthetic identity signups that pass document verification but share device characteristicsnot Unit21
  • A lender wanting first party fraud signals at application time that a credit bureau file does not containnot Unit21

Unit21

  • A neobank whose sponsor bank requires a documented monitoring programme before it will keep the BIN sponsorshipnot Sardine
  • A crypto exchange needing SAR filing and case management without building an internal compliance engineering teamnot Sardine
  • A payments startup where the fraud lead needs to ship a new rule the same day a new attack pattern appearsnot Sardine
  • A lender consolidating fraud alerts from three point tools into one investigator queue with a single audit trailnot Sardine

Where each one falls short

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

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.

Unit21

  • It is built for fintech scale rather than card issuer scale, so organisations reaching very high transaction volumes generally re-evaluate against heavier platforms and face a migration.
  • No-code rule authoring shifts power to the risk team, which is the point, but without governance it produces rule sprawl that nobody can explain to an examiner two years later.
  • Detection quality depends on the signals you feed it, so a thin integration produces thin results and the platform cannot compensate with proprietary consortium data the way larger vendors do.
  • Pricing is quoted by volume with an annual commitment, so a fintech whose growth stalls pays for headroom it did not use.
  • SAR filing coverage is oriented to United States FinCEN reporting, so firms filing in the United Kingdom, European Union or Asia handle those submissions outside the tool.

Pricing, plan by plan

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

Unit21

On request
  • Unit21 Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced by monitored volume and modules, annual contract
    • Fraud, AML and case management packaged separately
    • Implementation and historical data backfill quoted with the subscription

Which should you pick?

Choose Sardine if

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

Choose Unit21 if

  • You need no-code rule builder.
  • You also want case management.
Unit21 review

Questions people ask

Is Sardine or Unit21 better?
Neither clearly leads. Sardine starts at On request and Unit21 at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Sardine or Unit21?
Sardine starts at On request and Unit21 at On request.
Does Sardine or Unit21 run on more platforms?
Sardine runs on Web, iOS, Android. Unit21 runs on Web.
What is Sardine best used for?
Sardine is most often used for a neobank losing money to authorised push payment scams where the customer genuinely approved the transfer, a crypto exchange trying to detect accounts being operated by remote access rather than by their owner, a fintech seeing synthetic identity signups that pass document verification but share device characteristics, a lender wanting first party fraud signals at application time that a credit bureau file does not contain. Of those, a neobank losing money to authorised push payment scams where the customer genuinely approved the transfer and a crypto exchange trying to detect accounts being operated by remote access rather than by their owner are not what Unit21 is typically brought in for.
What can Sardine do that Unit21 cannot?
Sardine covers Device intelligence, Behaviour biometrics, Scam detection, Onboarding risk scoring. Unit21 covers No-code rule builder, Case management, SAR filing, Backtesting.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Unit21: Do we need engineers to run it?

Only for the initial data integration. After that the design intent is that risk and compliance staff author and deploy rules themselves.

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.

Unit21: Does it file SARs?

Yes, it generates and electronically files suspicious activity reports to FinCEN. Non-US regimes are not covered to the same depth.

Sardine: Is pricing published?

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

Unit21: Can we test a rule before it goes live?

Yes. Backtesting against historical data to see projected alert volume is one of the more useful parts of the product, because alert volume is the real cost.

Share

Related pages

More on Sardine

More on Unit21

Keep looking

Other head to heads