How to read this page
Every fact about Ocrolus below carries the date it was read and names where it came from: their home page, product pages and their documentation at docs.ocrolus.com, all read 2026-08-13.
Their headline number is an extraction claim, not a fraud claim. "Analyze financial documents with over 99+% accuracy" describes how well data is read out of a page (read 2026-08-13). Comparisons routinely blur that into a fraud-detection rate; their pages do not make that claim, and neither will this one.
Side by side
| Tamperlens | Ocrolus | Stronger | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Published prices | Free 50 a month; Solo $39 for 1,000; Team $199 for 10,000; Business $749 for 50,000; credit packs from $25 for 500 (/pricing). | None on the public site; per-document pricing cannot be established from outside (read 2026-08-13). | Tamperlens |
| Self-serve path | An API key with 50 free documents a month, and a free web checker with no signup at all. | A signup redirect exists (app.ocrolus.com/signup), but what lies behind it cannot be established from outside; the primary CTA is "Schedule demo" (read 2026-08-13). | Tamperlens |
| Price per document | $39 for 1,000 documents on Solo is $0.039 each. | No published price (read 2026-08-13). | — |
| Who it is built for | Anyone with a document to doubt. | Lenders: mortgage, SMB funding, auto, consumer, with tenant screening listed; logos include PayPal, Square, SoFi and Zillow (their site, read 2026-08-13). | — |
| Core job | Structural fraud signals only. No OCR, no data extraction: the numbers on the statement are never read out. | Document analysis and extraction: "Analyze financial documents with over 99+% accuracy", with Ocrolus-staffed "Data Professionals in SOC-compliant clean-room facilities" resolving edge cases (their site, read 2026-08-13). | Ocrolus |
| Fraud product's document coverage | Any PDF, image or Office file through one endpoint: 18 signal families on PDFs plus image and Office engines. | Their docs state exactly: "We support using Detect on bank statements, pay stubs, and W-2s. Other document types are not processed with Detect at this time." (docs.ocrolus.com/docs/detect, read 2026-08-13). | Tamperlens |
| Fraud signals | Structure, origin and history, page content, signatures, numbers; redaction recovery by paint order; document-borne prompt-injection signals; Brazilian identifier check-digit arithmetic. | Detect: file-integrity, content-consistency and layout-anomaly signals, screenshot detection, AI-generated artifact detection (their site and docs, read 2026-08-13). | — |
| Output shape | Signals, never verdicts: a caller-supplied policy computes accept/review/reject from your own thresholds. | An Authenticity Score from 0 to 100 with a High/Medium/Low status (their docs, read 2026-08-13). | — |
| Human review | None. The report is the product, and no person ever sees your file. | Ocrolus-staffed data professionals resolve extraction edge cases in clean-room facilities (their site, read 2026-08-13). | Ocrolus |
| Accuracy claims published | No detection rate. A false-positive rate is published at /evidence with its population and date. | 99+% for extraction; no fraud-catch rate: marketing cites "20% more fraud identified" in customer trials (read 2026-08-13). | — |
| False-positive rate published | Yes, at /evidence. | None published (read 2026-08-13). | Tamperlens |
| Buying the fraud check alone | That is the whole product. | Whether Detect is purchasable standalone cannot be established from outside (read 2026-08-13). | Tamperlens |
The two tools answer different questions
Left column from their site and docs, read 2026-08-13: "We support using Detect on bank statements, pay stubs, and W-2s. Other document types are not processed with Detect at this time." (docs.ocrolus.com/docs/detect), the Authenticity Score and status, and the clean-room data professionals. Right column is our own scope. The drawing shows two different jobs; it does not rank them, and "no extraction" is a hole in ours, not a feature.
Two numbers that are not a fraud rate
Two figures dominate their marketing, and a reader comparing fraud products should know what each one measures:
- "over 99+% accuracy" is an extraction claim: how faithfully the data on the page is read out, with humans resolving the edge cases (their site, read 2026-08-13). It says nothing about how often tampering is caught or a genuine file is flagged.
- "20% more fraud identified": a delta from customer trials (read 2026-08-13): more than what the customer caught before, which is not a rate, a baseline or a methodology.
Neither figure is dishonest: each measures what it measures. But no fraud-catch rate and no false-positive rate is published, and to their credit the extraction number is never dressed up as one. We publish no detection rate either; our published number is a false-positive rate, at /evidence.
Both quoted figures read 2026-08-13, from their site. Placing them on the pipeline is our reading of what each one measures, not a claim about their quality, and the same drawing indicts us: we publish nothing for the catch half of the middle box either.
Where Ocrolus is the better answer
- You need the data out of the documents. Extraction is their core product and we simply do not do it, not badly, not at all. If the job is "read every transaction off ten thousand bank statements", they are the platform and we are not a candidate.
- You want humans behind the hard cases. Their staffed clean-room review resolves what the machines cannot. Nobody reviews a Tamperlens report but you.
- You are a lender at scale. Mortgage, SMB funding, auto and consumer workflows are what the platform is shaped around, and PayPal, Square, SoFi and Zillow on the logo wall (read 2026-08-13) is a vetting bar a solo-operated product cannot match.
- Screenshot and AI-artifact detection tuned to their three document types, named explicitly as Detect features in their docs (read 2026-08-13), on top of the extraction pipeline you are already paying for.
Where Tamperlens is the better answer
- Your document is not a bank statement, pay stub or W-2. Their own docs limit Detect to those three types (read 2026-08-13). A contract, an invoice, a boleto, a medical report, a laudo (any PDF, image or Office file) goes through our one endpoint.
- You want a price you can read and a key today. Plans and per-document arithmetic are at /pricing, in USD and in reais; the free checker takes a file with no signup.
- No person may see the file. Documents are uploaded directly, parsed in memory and never written to disk. There is no human layer, which is a weakness for extraction and a guarantee for privacy.
- You need the check inside CI. The engine is deterministic, the same bytes produce the same report, so results can be regression-tested like any other build artifact.
- You want thresholds you control. We emit signals and your policy computes accept/review/reject; there is no 0, 100 score whose cut-offs you have to take on faith.
- You want the error rate before you buy. Our false-positive rate is at /evidence, and the engine's release log is public at /changelog.
- Brazil. CPF, CNPJ and boleto identifiers checked by arithmetic on the check digits, with prices quoted in BRL.
What we cannot do
- No extraction and no OCR. If you need the numbers off the statement, we do not read them out. That is their job, not ours.
- No human review service. There are no data professionals behind our reports.
- No bank-data connections and no identity verification.
- No SOC 2 or ISO 27001, disclosed at /security, and no on-premise deployment.
- Recall is unmeasured. We know how often we flag genuine documents; we do not know how often we catch real tampering.
- One region. Hosting is EU-only, and this is a solo-operated product.
The number a buyer actually needs
For a fraud check, the number that sets your review workload is how often a genuine document gets flagged. Ocrolus does not publish one for Detect (read 2026-08-13), and almost nobody in this market does.
Ours is at /evidence, with the population it was measured on, the date, and the engine version that produced it. The other comparisons are at /alternatives.
Read a report before you believe a comparison
Open the “Edited after creation” sample: a precomputed report on a document whose printed total was lowered by a second revision appended after creation. No account, no upload, no quota, and nothing on this page has to be taken on trust to look at it.
Tamperlens reports risk signals, not authenticity verdicts. Signals can have benign causes; combine them with your own decision logic.