Fraud Ruleset Bloat: Fix False Declines & Prevent Lost Revenue

What is fraud ruleset bloat?

Fraud ruleset bloat is when too many static or outdated rules pile up over time. It usually happens because teams layer new rules on top of old ones without a consistent process for review, testing or removal.

Even when each rule was added for a good reason, the system gets harder to manage and easier to misfire. Instead of cleanly separating good orders from bad, a bloated ruleset starts holding, reviewing or declining orders inconsistently.

What fraud ruleset bloat looks like for ecommerce businesses

Fraud ruleset bloat shows up differently depending on what you sell, how customers buy and where risk tends to concentrate.

Apparel brand example

An athleisure brand runs a massive clearance event and gets hit with bot-driven card testing. Fraudsters place rapid-fire, low-dollar orders on discounted items to see which stolen cards still work. The fraud team responds with a velocity rule tied to clearance purchases, like, “Flag any account that places more than three clearance-item orders in 60 minutes.” It works during the sale.

Six months later, the brand runs a “Buy More, Save More” loyalty event. Their best customers start building bigger carts for the whole family and placing multiple orders close together to lock in the deal. The clearance rule is still live, so those shoppers get treated like the card testers from the last event, and their orders get routed into review.

The same pattern shows up in other categories, especially when fulfillment speed and resale value are involved.

Beauty merchant example

A beauty tech brand drops a viral LED face mask. Because the mask has high resale value, reseller bots swarm the site using guest checkouts and overnight shipping to flip the product quickly. The team adds a defensive rule: “Send all guest orders with expedited shipping and mismatched billing and shipping addresses to manual review.”

Fast forward to the holidays. A traveler realizes she forgot a gift for her sister-in-law. After landing, she orders the mask from her phone, shipping it to her host’s house via overnight delivery. Nothing about the order is truly suspicious, but the old rule still triggers.

Her order sits in a backed-up holiday review queue long enough to miss the shipping cutoff. Because the order is already “processing,” she can’t cancel it. Instead, she waits for a late delivery and returns it immediately, turning a real sale into a lost one covered in reverse-logistics costs.

In other cases, bloat doesn’t just slow good orders. It can create blind spots that fraud slips through.

Electronics retailer example

An electronics retailer has a strict security rule: “Flag any order over $1,000 for manual review if the shipping address is a freight forwarder.” At the same time, to reward their most profitable customers, they have a priority rule: “Auto-approve all ‘Platinum Tier’ loyalty members to ensure instant fulfillment.”

A few months later, a fraudster executes a successful account takeover (ATO) on a Platinum member’s profile. They immediately purchase a $2,500 laptop and set the shipping address to a freight forwarding hub. In a cleaner ruleset, the forwarder check would have routed that order to review. But the VIP auto-approve rule takes precedence, so the order gets waved through. The problem isn’t that either rule is unreasonable on its own. It’s that the ruleset has accumulated exceptions over time that let the fraudster bypass a security check that would have caught most other shoppers.

Four consequences of fraud ruleset bloat

1. Lower approval rates and more false declines

When static fraud protection rules are too rigid, fraud systems often default to the safest outcome: hold or decline anything that doesn’t match an expected pattern. That pushes more legitimate orders into the “suspicious” bucket, which lowers approval rates and increases merchant-side false declines.

2. Slower order decisions that hurt customer experience

As rules pile up, more orders land in “needs review” limbo instead of getting a clean approve/decline decision. That delay shows up in the places customers actually feel: slower confirmation, slower fulfillment, more “where’s my order?” tickets and more cancellations when shoppers don’t get a fast update that their order is being processed.

3. More manual work for teams and less time for real investigations

Ruleset bloat doesn’t just accidentally decline more orders. It also routes more orders into manual review because overlapping rules create more “maybe” outcomes. That work adds up quickly. Signifyd data shows manual review costs about 3.47% of the purchase price per transaction. So if you’re manually reviewing 1,000 orders a month and your average order value is $80, you’re losing over $33,000 each year to review costs alone.

And the bigger cost isn’t just dollars. It’s attention. When your analysts are busy clearing low-risk orders triggered by tangled rules, they have less time to do the work that actually drives fraud down and approval rates up over the long term.

4. Slower fraud response times

When fraud volume spikes, your fraud team often can’t act immediately. They first have to pinpoint what’s driving the increase: which rules are firing, whether multiple rules are tripping at once and whether it’s real fraud or your own logic raising red flags. That diagnosis takes time, which makes it harder to roll out changes quickly and safely.

How ruleset bloat can increase fraud risk

It sounds backwards, but a bigger fraud ruleset can make your business more vulnerable to bad actors.

Predictable rules are easier to exploit

Static rules create edges. Fraudsters probe those edges until they find the safe lane.

If your controls are built around thresholds (X orders per hour, Y cart value, Z mismatch patterns), attackers can tune their behavior to stay right under them. They can also split attempts across accounts, devices and delivery addresses to avoid triggering any single rule.

Conflicting rules create blind spots

As we know, rules can overlap. And when they do, they can contradict each other. This creates “logic gaps” where fraud can bypass your defenses entirely. It can happen in a few ways, one being when a priority rule (designed for a good experience) overrides a risk rule (designed for security).

Let’s go back to the electronics merchant example from earlier with an “Auto-approve all VIP Loyalty members orders” rule. Because the VIP rule was prioritized to protect the customer experience, it blinded the system to the address. In this case, the fraudster didn’t have to break their security; they just had to find the one exception rule that was designed to override it.

Agentic commerce makes “normal” behavior less reliable

As artificial intelligence (AI) tools and agents get more involved in browsing and buying, more legitimate orders will look less “human” than they used to. Visa reports that 47% of U.S. ecommerce shoppers now use AI for at least one shopping task. They also predict millions will use AI agents to complete purchases by the 2026 holiday season.

That matters because many of today’s rulesets have been built on human habits: how fast someone checks out, how often they compare items and what a “normal” cart looks like. So, if an agent builds a cart quickly, checks out from a new device or routes shipping in a new way, an old rule might treat the agentic commerce purchase as suspicious.

How to prevent ruleset bloat and protect against fraud

Rules are still useful. The trouble starts when they become your primary decision layer and keep piling up. To help protect against bloat and its inherent fraud risks, consider:

• Putting rules on a lifecycle: Every rule needs an owner, a purpose and an expiration date.
• Regularly reviewing what they actually do: Track impact on approvals, disputes and review volume. If a rule drags down your approval rate or pushes more orders into review without reducing fraud losses or chargebacks, retire it.
• Consolidating overlap: Merge duplicative velocity and mismatch checks so you don’t create “maybe” outcomes by accident.
• Use adaptive decisioning: AI and machine learning (ML) help spot patterns rules miss, approve legitimate orders that look unusual and catch coordinated attacks designed to hover right under static limits. Solutions like Signifyd’s Guaranteed Fraud Protection uses AI and ML to learn from network-wide signals, and automatically adapts without analysts having to constantly add new rules or fine-tune them.

Cut your ruleset without shrinking revenue

Ruleset bloat starts with good intent, but it doesn’t stay harmless. Over time it holds and declines more good orders, feeds the review queue and makes real fraud harder to spot.

Signifyd’s Guaranteed Fraud Protection helps you step out of that cycle by making the risk call at checkout with an instant approve or decline decision. It evaluates each order using intelligence from an identity and intent network, so you’re not relying on a handful of brittle rules to separate good from bad. It also runs custom, chained models across ecommerce verticals, which keeps decisions aligned to how fraud actually shows up in your category. And it learns from outcomes as new data comes in, so you’re not paying for ruleset clutter later in avoidable review holds and false declines.

Photo by Getty Images

Want to see for yourself how machine-learning solutions protect without bloat? Check out our demo. Watch our on-demand demo.