We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiAuthenticator and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its best feature is definitely the process design. It is quite easy and straightforward to design a process."
"When we started with identity and access management, we cleaned up and skipped 500 accounts. Therefore, there are a lot of people who are still in our system. Using this tool, we have cleaned up a lot of accounts for ourselves as well as our partners and suppliers. So, we can manage everything now."
"The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"The teams we work with at Omada provide great insights and support. Overall, it has been a pleasure working with them. That's the part we value the most."
"For me, the best feature of Omada Identity is its web interface because it's really easy for users to understand."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"What I like most is that we can always find a solution, and we can also find the cause when something goes wrong. I like that the most because everything is in one way or another traceable. That is what I like most. I like its reliability."
"The most valuable aspect of the product is that it is Microsoft-based and it supports all Microsoft technology."
"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."
"The initial setup is so easy and there is no problem in the implementation."
"The solution's most valuable aspect is that it easy to install. The user experience is very good."
"It integrates very tightly with the rest of the Fortinet ecosystem."
"Features the addition and removal of access as needed for the VPN."
"The ease of use is really nice. Using Authenticator, I've been able to actually work better on my authentication due to the fact that I have a single fabric to authenticate control from my firewall and on my access points. Authentication takes place from this area."
"The initial setup is a valuable point on Fortinet products. Most of the time, putting the theory into practice on the devices is quite friendly and straightforward. As long as you can read English you can find your way around the solution and make it work. This is a high value point on Fortinet - the way everything is laid out in the web UI is user-friendly and quite straightforward. The UI is quite simple."
"The product’s most valuable feature is integration with FortiGate, FortiToken, FortiTalk, and multi-factor authentication."
"Saviynt risk-based access requests and intelligent access controls have made a significant impact on our company."
"We have found the implementation process to be very easy."
"The most valuable features of Saviynt are database utility and report generation. These two features have a major impact, particularly when you are trying to create a report because, in other systems, you need to use a third-party utility such as a BI tool or any other reporting tool to fetch the data and send out the report to a third party team. In Saviynt, it's a system within a system, so you don't have to use any third-party tool because you can directly do your query and write that code on Saviynt and then send that report to the team."
"The dedicated Freshdesk platform is a user community and a step in the right direction for offering learning resources."
"This product works well out of the box and if you don’t want to do a lot of configuration then this is the best tool."
"Saviynt is easy to configure and manage."
"It is a flexible tool because it works on JSON."
"The feature that we use the most is the global, third-party user management."
"It is not possible to customize reports on Omada Identity."
"When the re-certification process is launched that makes Omada very slow. There are performance issues in the current version."
"Its flexibility is both a good thing and a bad thing. Because it is very flexible, it also becomes too complex. This is common for most of the products we evaluated. Its scalability should be better. It had a few scalability issues."
"The current reporting tools in Omada are limited, but we expect significant improvements in the new version."
"Omada's performance could be better because we had some latency issues. Still, it's difficult to say how much of that is due to Omada versus the resources used by our other vendors in our on-prem environment. Considering the resources we have invested into making it run well, it's slightly slower than we would expect."
"They need to improve the cost for small companies."
"The user interface should have a more flexible design, where you can change it to your requirement."
"The comprehensiveness of Omada's out-of-the-box connectors for the applications we use could be better. We are getting a new HR system called Cornerstone for which they do not have an out-of-the-box connector, so we have to take the REST connector and play around with it."
"The hardware aspect of the solution could be improved. We are not really able to understand the hardware capabilities of the device."
"We have issues with HA (high availability). These should be addressed in future releases."
"Lacks a simplified two-factor authentication process."
"The only issue I encounter is that when not using FortiAuthenticator for an extended period, it's typical to encounter some obstacles in the configuration process that you need to address."
"A better integration with other vendors."
"FortiAuthenticator's interface could be better."
"I would like to see integration and customization capabilities with the end-user portal to solve authentication issues with diverse implementation scenarios."
"We had issues trying to integrate the keys properly during the initial setup."
"Both SailPoint IdentityNow and Saviynt have some bugs, but SailPoint is considered more mature with fewer bugs due to its longer establishment in the market since around 2005. SailPoint had its share of bugs in the early days, but they have resolved them over time, resulting in a stable product. Saviynt, on the other hand, was launched around 2013 or 2014 and is actively working to improve its product. Despite having some bugs, Saviynt is making progress and aims to build a stable product, but it is not there yet."
"The main difficulty was the integration process itself. But we were able to kind of work through it and fix it. We tried integrating with our HR system and other IBM solutions, like Microsoft Identity Management."
"The tool is difficult to migrate."
"An area for improvement in Saviynt is that there's a limitation on the number of logs you can get from the past twenty-four hours. For example, if the data is huge, the tool can only give you a maximum of one hundred logs. You can't get any further than that. In the next version of Saviynt, however, you can get more logs and you'll see them inside the log rotation. For example, when you're trying to search inside the log, you can select a date range, and then you can search for a particular log. We haven't used that new log rotation feature yet, but it's included in the next release of Saviynt. Another area for improvement in the tool is that it doesn't have a server monitoring feature, so if your server has a high load, it should give you a warning. You're supposed to get an alert similar to what's being done in WebLogic. In WebLogic, we had a separate facility, but in Saviynt, that feature's missing."
"The solution does not work very well as the number of users increases."
"It should support more customizations. In SailPoint, we can do many customizations, but we are not able to do that in Saviynt. For workflows and other things, we can only use what is already in place. Saviynt has a lot of scope for improvement on the customization part."
"The configuration process at the beginning can be difficult, depending on the complexity of the company."
"The UI doesn’t enhance the user experience."
Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is ranked 7th in Identity Management (IM) with 52 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 5th in Identity Management (IM) with 21 reviews. Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is rated 8.0, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. 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 Saviynt writes "Used for IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management". Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Fortinet FortiToken, Cisco Duo and Microsoft Entra ID, whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint Identity Security Cloud, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Okta Workforce Identity and Oracle Identity Governance. See our Fortinet FortiAuthenticator vs. Saviynt report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.
