Top 10 Best Anti Fraud Consulting Services of 2026

KPMG anti fraud engagements commonly start with a fraud risk assessment that maps threat scenarios to internal controls, then moves into targeted transaction testing and investigative workstreams where justified. For post-finding activity, KPMG typically supports allegations triage, case intake structuring, and evidence preservation workflows that reduce gaps between interviews, records, and reporting. Delivery tends to fit organizations that need documented reasoning trails from risk hypotheses to testing evidence and final conclusions.

A tradeoff appears when rapid, low-context investigations are required without process work for governance and documentation, because KPMG’s rigor can extend timelines for scoping, approvals, and evidence handling. A strong usage situation is an enterprise procurement or revenue fraud allegation where multidisciplinary teams must align on control weaknesses, data access boundaries, interview plans, and repeatable remediation steps.

PwC commonly supports fraud risk management programs that map business processes to fraud control gaps and oversight responsibilities. Investigations often follow repeatable case intake, evidence preservation, and stakeholder interview planning that reduce handoff friction between legal, finance, and operations. The main fit signal is the ability to coordinate procurement, finance, HR, and technology stakeholders while maintaining documented work products suitable for internal and external scrutiny.

A tradeoff is that delivery speed can depend on client input quality and data access readiness because PwC teams build evidence packages and control narratives around what is available. PwC is most useful when a single allegation or control failure needs coordinated investigative interviewing, accounting analysis, and a remediation plan across multiple business units.

EY fits organizations that need defensible methods for fraud risk assessment and fraud examination, especially when work must map to control expectations and withstand scrutiny. Teams commonly run internal controls testing, transaction testing, and interview planning with chain-of-custody discipline for artifacts and communications. Deliverables usually focus on actionable fraud control recommendations, prioritized risk registers, and case narratives that can be reused across internal and external stakeholders.

A tradeoff is that EY delivery is consultancy-led rather than a turnkey investigation platform, which limits self-serve automation for continuous monitoring. EY works well when investigators must coordinate with legal, compliance, and IT for evidence preservation and analysis, or when allegations require structured intake, triage, and case management.

Kroll provides anti fraud consulting anchored in investigative, forensic, and risk advisory work across dispute support, intelligence gathering, and case execution. The firm delivers structured fraud risk assessment outputs that translate into fraud control frameworks, investigation plans, and governance-ready documentation.

Engagements commonly pair allegations triage with evidence handling workflows and expert support for regulators, counsel, and internal stakeholders. Integration depth depends on how Kroll’s team embeds with a client’s systems, and documentation depth varies by workstream rather than offering a single standardized automation product.

AlixPartners provides anti-fraud consulting through fraud risk assessment, investigative support, and remediation planning tied to real operating controls. Teams typically receive end-to-end work that starts with risk and controls mapping, then moves into allegations triage, evidence planning, and investigation execution.

Delivery often includes fraud control framework guidance and governance artifacts that translate findings into testable control changes. Compared with larger advisory peers, the differentiator is the breadth of investigation and remediation work offered without forcing clients to stitch together multiple specialists.

Protiviti supports anti fraud programs through consulting engagements that combine fraud risk assessment, control testing, and investigative workstreams. The firm is distinct for translating findings into a fraud control framework that ties risk themes to practical mitigations across finance, procurement, and operations.

Delivery typically covers fraud examination planning, allegations triage, evidence preservation guidance, and reportable recommendations for governance owners. Engagement teams also address enterprise fraud control lifecycle needs, not only case-level outcomes.

FTI Consulting delivers anti fraud consulting through forensic-focused engagements that combine investigative accounting and risk-based testing. Its service model typically centers on fraud risk assessment, allegations triage, and evidence-driven examinations rather than generic controls documentation.

Client work often includes case intake workflows, interviewing support, and structured reporting for governance and remediation. For organizations coordinating with regulators or internal audit, FTI Consulting’s approach emphasizes traceable methods and defensible findings.

Deloitte delivers anti-fraud consulting grounded in large-scale risk advisory, forensic accounting, and controlled evidence workflows across complex enterprises. Core work covers fraud risk assessment and fraud control design, then moves into targeted fraud examination support for allegations triage, document preservation, and investigative analysis.

Deloitte also supports fraud risk management programs that connect findings to internal controls testing and executive reporting structures. Its typical differentiation is end-to-end delivery across regulatory, operational, and technology stakeholders rather than narrow case-only engagement.

RSM US delivers anti-fraud consulting that centers on fraud risk assessment, fraud control evaluation, and investigation support for financial and operational allegations. Engagements typically combine forensic-style evidence handling with testing approaches that map findings to control improvements and governance needs.

RSM US also provides ongoing fraud risk management guidance, including development of fraud risk registers and monitoring recommendations tied to specific business processes. The firm’s differentiation is the integration of advisory, investigation support, and internal controls work into a single delivery stream rather than a standalone hotline or case-only intake service.

StoneTurn delivers anti-fraud consulting built around fraud risk assessment, forensic and investigative accounting workstreams, and evidence-focused case support. Teams typically use StoneTurn for allegations triage, transaction testing support, and internal-control testing tied to a fraud risk register and specific fraud scenarios.

Delivery is geared toward regulated environments where documentation quality matters for audit trails and chain of custody handling. StoneTurn also supports dispute and recovery contexts through investigative techniques that connect findings to remediations and quantified exposure.