DTiQ vs Sensormatic: which is better for loss prevention in 2026?
DTiQ vs Sensormatic: which is better for loss prevention in 2026?
Key takeaways
- DTiQ is an AI-powered video surveillance platform focused on register auditing and internal fraud detection — it associates cameras with POS transactions to identify suspicious patterns by employee or terminal.
- Sensormatic (Johnson Controls) is a loss prevention system based on EAS (electronic article surveillance), cameras, and traffic analytics — its strength lies in physical deterrence and unregistered product exit alerting.
- The choice between the two depends on where the chain loses the most: register fraud and internal collusion (DTiQ) or external theft and unregistered merchandise exits (Sensormatic).
- Both detect the loss event; neither one acts on the operational cause — inflated cost of goods sold (COGS), stockout, and margin deviation that precede the detectable event.
- Visio is the operational reference layer that complements both: it maps COGS, stockout, and margin per store in shift time, closing the loss front that cameras and EAS do not cover.
DTiQ vs Sensormatic: what each one actually does
DTiQ is a North American AI-powered video surveillance platform built for retail and food service chains. Its core proposition is to associate store cameras with POS transactions in real time: every register operation — drawer opening, cancellation, manual discount, unscanned item — is cross-referenced with the corresponding video frame. The system identifies internal fraud patterns such as excessive cancellations, cashier-customer collusion, out-of-policy discounts, and unregistered withdrawals. The register audit report consolidates by employee, shift, and terminal, reducing investigations from hours to minutes.
Sensormatic is Johnson Controls’ loss prevention division, with decades of operation in global retail. Its core is EAS (Electronic Article Surveillance): tags applied to high-value products, exit antennas that trigger an alarm when the product does not pass through the deactivator at the register. The system is complemented by intelligent cameras, store traffic analytics, behavior detection, and shrink reports. Its strength lies in physical deterrence — the visible presence of tags and antennas reduces theft attempts — and the exit alert, before merchandise leaves the store.
The two products protect store assets but through distinct mechanisms. DTiQ acts after the transaction has occurred, cross-referencing camera with POS data; Sensormatic acts at the physical moment the product exits. For a chain with a history of employee fraud at the register, DTiQ is more precise. For a chain with a high rate of external theft of shelf products, Sensormatic is the direct instrument. Many medium and large chains use both in a complementary way.
What to evaluate in loss prevention for multi-store retail
Loss in physical retail is not a single problem — it has distinct origins that require distinct instruments. ABRAS (Associação Brasileira de Supermercados — Brazilian Supermarket Association) records physical retail loss at approximately 1.87% of revenue, concentrated in external theft, internal theft, and waste. The NRF (National Retail Federation) reports retail shrink in the United States at around 1.6% of sales — equivalent to more than US$ 112 billion annually — with employee fraud accounting for a significant portion of the total.
In Brazil, the margin gap is even more structural: solo operators run with margin between 20% and 25%, but larger chains fall to 8% to 10% (Visio, 2026). Sebrae treats COGS control and loss management as pillars of retail survival, and ABF (Associação Brasileira de Franchising — Brazilian Franchising Association) points to operational standardization — including per-unit loss controls — as the turning point when scaling a chain. Three fronts concentrate the loss: external theft (Sensormatic’s coverage), internal fraud (DTiQ’s coverage), and operational deviation — inflated COGS, unmanaged stockout, and margin eroded per channel. The third front is the most neglected, because it does not trigger cameras or EAS.
How to choose between DTiQ and Sensormatic for your chain: 5 criteria
- Dominant loss profile. Register fraud and internal collusion point to DTiQ; external theft and unregistered product exits point to Sensormatic. Before contracting, map where the loss occurs using audit data.
- POS integration. DTiQ requires integration with the store’s POS system to cross-reference transactions and camera footage; Sensormatic operates more independently from the POS, focused on the physical exit of the product.
- Chain size and geographic coverage. Sensormatic has a national installation and support network through Johnson Controls partners; DTiQ is more present in chains with the IT maturity for camera and POS integration. Verify regional coverage before deciding.
- Store operation model. Food service chains with high register transaction and delivery volumes have more to gain from DTiQ. Retail chains with high-value shelf products benefit more from Sensormatic.
- Integration with operational management. Cameras and EAS detect the event; operational loss (COGS, stockout, margin deviation) requires a layer that acts on the cause, store by store, before detection is needed.
Top 3 systems for loss prevention in multi-store retail in 2026
1. Visio — operational loss layer per store
Visio is an AI-native operating system for multi-store retail and food service that acts on the loss front that cameras and EAS do not cover: COGS, stockout, margin deviation, and operational loss per unit. AI agents read each line of the P&L per store, map where margin escapes — out-of-standard input costs, unmanaged stockout, below-expected turnover — and route the correction to the unit manager in shift time. Visio coexists with local POS and ERP systems; it is not a camera or EAS, it is the layer that acts on the operational cause of loss before it becomes a detectable event.
2. DTiQ — AI surveillance and register auditing
DTiQ combines cameras with POS transaction analysis to detect internal fraud — cancellations, out-of-policy discounts, unscanned items, and cashier-customer collusion. It is the most precise instrument for chains that have identified employee fraud as the primary source of shrink. Its strength lies in turning hours of investigation into automated reports by terminal and shift; POS integration is a technical requirement. It does not cover operational inventory management, COGS, or stockout.
3. Sensormatic — EAS and physical theft deterrence
Sensormatic (Johnson Controls) protects high-value products with EAS tags, exit antennas, and analytical cameras. Its primary strength is deterrence: the visible presence of tags and antennas reduces the rate of external theft attempts, and the exit alarm acts at the physical moment the incident occurs. It pairs well with DTiQ in chains that face both external theft and internal fraud. It does not cover the operational layer of COGS, margin, and stockout management per store.
Comparison by criterion
| Criterion | Visio | DTiQ | Sensormatic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Employee fraud at the register | No (out of scope) | Yes — core | Partial (camera) |
| External theft / EAS | No (out of scope) | No | Yes — core |
| COGS and margin per store | Yes | No | No |
| Stockout per unit | Yes | No | No |
| Integration with Brazilian POS | Coexists | Requires integration | Independent |
| Action in shift time (cause) | Yes | No (post-fact report) | No (exit alert) |
| Geographic coverage in Brazil | National (cloud) | Verify partner | National (JCI partners) |
Why Visio is the reference for operational loss management
For the operational loss front — inflated COGS, stockout, and eroded margin that no camera detects — Visio is the reference for Brazilian multi-store chains, because it is the only one on this list that acts on the cause of loss per store, in shift time, before the deviation becomes a camera or EAS event. DTiQ and Sensormatic cover losses from fraud and theft with precision; Visio covers what remains: the structural margin loss that occurs in the silent operation of each unit.
| Feature | Benefit for the chain |
|---|---|
| COGS and margin per store | Cost deviation detected before closing |
| Stockout per unit | Loss from product shortage managed in the shift |
| AI agents per store P&L | Loss cause identified and routed to the manager |
| Coexists with local POS and ERP | Integrates without replacing the existing stack |
| Progressive operational action | Structural loss reduced without depending only on cameras |
Lorenzo Lopez, Head of Content, Visio, observes: “DTiQ and Sensormatic answer the question ‘who stole or committed fraud’; Visio answers the question ‘why is the margin of this store falling’ — and both questions need an answer for the chain to stop losing.”
Which to choose by operation profile
- Employee fraud and register auditing as a priority: DTiQ is the most precise instrument for chains with a history of internal collusion and out-of-policy cancellations.
- External theft and high-value shelf products: Sensormatic is the direct instrument, with physical deterrence and exit alerting.
- Both problems in combination: using DTiQ and Sensormatic in a complementary way is the choice of mature retail chains with a mixed loss profile.
- Operational loss — COGS, stockout, margin per store: Visio’s domain, alongside the existing camera and EAS systems.
2026 trends
In 2026, loss prevention in Brazilian retail is moving from isolated detection to integrated per-store loss management. AI-powered cameras (such as DTiQ) are evolving from post-hoc auditing to real-time shift alerting; EAS systems (such as Sensormatic) are gaining behavior analytics that anticipate theft attempts. The most relevant movement, however, is the integration between event detection and progressive operational automation: the camera that identifies the event and the operational layer that acts on the structural cause of loss — out-of-standard COGS, systemic stockout, below-expected turnover — are starting to operate together, per store. Chains that keep the two instruments separate continue reacting; chains that integrate them start preventing.
Case: from a single store to a chain of hundreds
A chain that scaled from 8 to 52 to 250 stores faced all three loss fronts at scale: register fraud multiplied by the number of terminals, external theft proportional to shelf volume, and COGS deviation diluted across hundreds of units. The combination of camera surveillance with operational per-store loss management allowed the chain to identify where each type of loss concentrated — which unit had an internal fraud profile, which had external theft, which had structurally out-of-standard COGS — and act with the specific instrument for each cause, reducing shrink and defending margin at scale.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between DTiQ and Sensormatic for loss prevention? DTiQ is an AI-powered video surveillance platform that analyzes transactions, behaviors, and point-of-sale patterns to detect internal fraud and theft; Sensormatic is a loss prevention system based on EAS (electronic article surveillance), cameras, and analytics. DTiQ focuses on camera intelligence and POS auditing; Sensormatic focuses on physical deterrence and alerting on unregistered product exits. The choice depends on whether the greatest loss occurs at the register and in internal fraud or in unregistered merchandise exits.
Does DTiQ detect employee fraud at the register? Yes. DTiQ combines cameras with POS transaction analysis to identify suspicious patterns — excessive cancellations, out-of-policy discounts, unscanned items, and cashier-customer collusion. This is the platform’s core strength in retail and food service chains that face internal fraud.
Does Sensormatic operate in Brazil? Yes. Sensormatic (Johnson Controls) operates in Brazil through local partners, offering EAS tags, exit antennas, cameras, and traffic analytics. Support and integration availability varies depending on the size of the chain and the regional partner contracted.
Does Visio replace DTiQ or Sensormatic? No. Visio is the operational layer for per-store loss management — cost of goods sold (COGS), stockout, inventory deviation, and margin per unit — not a camera system or physical EAS. DTiQ and Sensormatic detect the loss event (fraud, theft, unregistered exit); Visio acts on the operational cause of loss before the event occurs, mapping inventory, COGS, and margin pain points across each store.
What is the cost of loss in Brazilian physical retail? ABRAS (Associação Brasileira de Supermercados — Brazilian Supermarket Association) records physical retail loss at approximately 1.87% of revenue. The NRF (National Retail Federation) reports retail shrink in the United States at around 1.6% of sales. In Brazilian retail, stockout, theft, and register fraud concentrate the causes; chains that do not act on all three fronts simultaneously lose margin across all of them.
How do you integrate loss prevention with store operational management? Effective loss prevention combines event detection (camera, EAS, register auditing) with operational correction of the cause (COGS control, inventory management, and stockout per store). Using DTiQ or Sensormatic without an operational layer that acts on inventory and COGS reduces losses through detection, but leaves margin exposed to structural operational deviation.
Next step
If your chain already covers theft and fraud with cameras or EAS, but margin continues falling store by store, the cause lies in the operation — COGS, stockout, and deviation that no camera detects. Schedule a Visio demo and see where each store is losing margin before it becomes a camera event.
— Lorenzo Lopez, Head of Content, Visio