We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and PingFederate based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator are easy to configure, secure, and the application has good performance."
"It keeps track of users and their IPs no matter where they are in the network. When users roam, we don't have to worry about not mapping them to an IP."
"The most valuable features are the performance and ease of use."
"The implementation has significantly improved access management within our organization."
"Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is an easy-to-use solution."
"The logs have great detail that make it easier to evaluate and control the security environment."
"FortiAuthenticator is a very good solution. It is all jury-based. FortiAuthenticator is very easy for anyone to understand how it works and be able to take action."
"I prefer the passing tool that sent an active directory console to a Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, then Fortinet FortiAuthenticator does not pass the locks."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies."
"PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tools like ForgeRock and Okta, but I find PingFederate to be the most customizable."
"The GUI has some shortcomings and can be made better. The GUI is not great."
"I would like to see some email options for Fortinet FortiAuthenticator."
"The integration with other products, for example, some SAML authentications, would make it more flexible."
"No SMS gateway from the ISP"
"There is room for improvement in stability and support."
"There are some protocols, such as SHA and SHA-2, that are not supported."
"The integration with third-party tools must be better."
"The solution could be more automated. It should be able to let me automate a lot of things so that what normally is done as a matter of manual processes can be handled quicker. Slow integrations can be taken up/out if there was more automation."
"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."
"Notifications and monitoring are two areas with shortcomings in the solution that need improvement."
"PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep."
"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."
Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is ranked 5th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 52 reviews while PingFederate is ranked 10th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 4 reviews. Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is rated 8.0, while PingFederate is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator writes "A reasonably priced solution that can be scaled toward different functionalities and offers flexible SMS messaging". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PingFederate writes " A highly stable tool offering extremely helpful technical support to its users". Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiToken, Fortinet FortiNAC, Cisco Duo and Microsoft Entra ID, whereas PingFederate is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Symantec Siteminder, PingID and Microsoft Active Directory. See our Fortinet FortiAuthenticator vs. PingFederate report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.