MMP requirements checklist for fintech apps

What is an MMP requirements checklist for fintech?

An MMP requirements checklist for fintech is a weighted list of the attribution needs specific to lending, payments, trading and banking apps, where paid installs are expensive, incentives attract fraud and user data is regulated.

Fintech weighting: the same 17 requirements as any evaluation, with fraud, compliance, data residency and exports moved to must-have. Set the weights below in the scorecard and it marks all nine MMPs from their published facts.

Fintech differs from games or shopping apps in three ways that change the weights:

• High payouts attract fraud. Sign-up bonuses, referral rewards and high cost per acquisition make fake installs and stolen credit worth faking.
• Security reviews are mandatory. Banks, partners and auditors ask for certifications before an SDK ships.
• Data stays close. Many teams need user-level data inside their own cloud, and every event they pass on must be explainable.

What fraud protection should a fintech app look for when choosing an MMP?

Look for fraud detection included on the plan you will actually buy, coverage of the main install fraud types, and a clear choice of what happens to a flagged install: tagged in reports, or also kept out of ad network postbacks so bidding does not learn from it.

The fraud types to ask about by name:

• Click injection: a malicious app fires a click just before an install completes to steal credit.
• Click flooding: large volumes of clicks from one IP or device hoping to catch organic installs.
• Install hijacking and SDK spoofing: fake install or event signals sent without a real user, sometimes with a mismatched IP.
• Bots and device farms: scripted or farmed devices that complete sign-up to collect a reward.

SDK spoofing: fake attribution traffic built to look like it came from a real app's SDK, used to claim installs or in-app events that never happened.

How the nine vendors publish fraud coverage, A to Z, from their pricing pages:

• Adjust: the Fraud Prevention Suite is a paid add-on.
• Airbridge: fraud detection is on the Growth plan only.
• AppMetrica: fraud detection is a paid add-on.
• AppsFlyer: basic and advanced fraud protection (Protect360) are separate pricing rows; advanced is paid.
• Branch: fraud reporting on every plan, with prevention emphasised from Essentials.
• Kochava: "AI-Powered Ad Fraud Prevention" on the free plan; the Fraud Console is Enterprise.
• Linkrunner: Fraud Control on every plan, with 8 rule templates (click injection, install hijacking, SDK spoofing with and without IP mismatch, click flooding by IP and by device, and installs and reinstalls from fraudulent clicks). Each rule can tag only, or tag and withhold postbacks.
• Singular: "Fraud Prevention included in every plan".
• Tenjin: fraud prevention in its all-inclusive feature list.

Score "Fraud protection included" as a must-have on the pricing criteria page. Then put the depth questions in writing: which fraud types are detected, whether flagged installs still reach Meta and Google, and whether rules act before or after attribution. For the symptoms that suggest fraud in your own numbers, our sister site's page on ad network installs that look too good to be true walks through the checks.

Which compliance and data needs should a fintech app weight?

Give these a 3 if a bank partner, auditor or regulator reviews your vendors:

• Enterprise compliance (SOC 2 Type 2 and ISO 27001): Airbridge, AppsFlyer, Branch and Linkrunner state both; Singular and Tenjin state both without a SOC 2 type; Adjust and AppMetrica state ISO 27001 only; Kochava states SOC 2 Type II only.
• Self-hosted option: Linkrunner offers Bring Your Own Cloud on Enterprise, keeping raw events, identifiers and PII in your own cloud. The other eight do not publish one; Singular lists "private cloud deployments" without defining them.
• Unrestricted raw exports: your risk and finance teams will want user-level rows. Adjust, AppMetrica (Logs API), Linkrunner and Tenjin include them; the others put them on paid or Enterprise plans or do not say.
• PII handling: ask whether email or phone identifiers are hashed in the SDK before they leave the device, whether hashing is opt-in, and which identifiers are passed on to ad networks.

Each mark, with its source, is on the privacy and SKAN criteria page and the data and exports page.

Suggested fintech weights

• 3 (must have): fraud protection included, enterprise compliance, unrestricted data exports.
• 2 (important): self-hosted option, warehouse delivery, SKAN 4 support, price at your volume.
• 1 (nice to have): deferred deep linking (for referral links), web-to-app attribution, India support if that is your market.
• 0 (skip unless relevant): CTV attribution, agency multi-client access.

Weight track record and partner ecosystem at 2 if procurement asks for a long vendor history: that is where AppsFlyer, Adjust, Kochava, Singular and Tenjin score highest, and where vendors founded in the last few years with short partner lists score lowest.

How do the vendors look with fintech weights?

Run on the scorecard with the weights above, leaving price at your volume and track record and partner ecosystem at 0 (price depends on your own install count), the confirmed scores put Linkrunner first at 94%, Tenjin second at 78% and Singular third at 67%. Linkrunner is the only vendor marked yes on all three must-haves and on self-hosting; Tenjin matches it on fraud, compliance and exports, and its plans are built mainly for games.

Raise track record and partner ecosystem to 2 and Tenjin moves ahead, 82% to 77%; at 3, Singular also moves into second place. That is the trade a fintech team should make on purpose, not by default. Linkrunner's attribution for fintech apps page covers its fraud rules and revenue postbacks to Meta and Google in more depth.

Copy the questions for every must-have from the MMP RFP template and send the same set to your shortlist.