We performed a comparison between BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk, Delinea, BeyondTrust and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM)."The tool is easy to use and deploy. It has PAM capabilities like privilege access. The solution helps with the management of third parties and vendors. It is an effective solution compared to other alternatives."
"The privileged access and the application control are helpful in making sure we have good, robust challenge responses. Blacklisting with trusted application protection is also beneficial for us."
"It is straightforward. It is a good technology, and it is made to do one single thing."
"I find the solution’s features like section management, password management, and analytics valuable."
"The notable aspect is its ability to capture the application's behavior comprehensively and this thorough analysis is crucial for effective policy management."
"The solution's technical support is good."
"The features related to application elevate is amazing. It helped the company to remove almost all admin local users."
"BeyondTrust has very good integrations with quite a lot of security vendors such as SailPoint, IBM, FortiGuard, Splunk, etc."
"The product is flexible to use."
"Saviynt provides built-in access recommendations, while SailPoint IdentityNow offers access recommendations through a separate AI integration that requires additional licensing. Saviynt functions as a unified platform for various business operations, consolidating user and access data from multiple sources into a single platform. This allows for leveraging the same user base and data across different business functions, including access governance, privileged access management, data access governance, and third-party access governance. In contrast, SailPoint is a decoupled tool, requiring separate integration for managing access and permissions, especially for unstructured data. Saviynt's approach is more integrated and streamlined, providing a unified platform for access recommendations and various business operations."
"One of the tool's advantages is its user-friendly interface, making it easier to manipulate from a GUI perspective. The graphical user interface for users and administrators is straightforward. While it may require more configuration initially, once set up, it becomes more accessible and easier to use."
"The repository has many features where you can define primary and secondary owners."
"It gives very good and in-depth knowledge about a particular identity. Everything is through a single click. We get to know the workflows related to a particular identity with a single click."
"Considering the initial cost and the basic features, this is a good solution that provides integration with both on-premise and cloud applications."
"It is a flexible tool because it works on JSON."
"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."
"The help system should be improved to provide a quick help guide with each tab within the solution, which explains what each particular function does."
"It should support XWindows Remote Desktop Access protocol for Linux/Unix."
"If you don't get the implementation right at the outset, you will struggle with the product."
"There are three types of endpoints. If we need to use them in the solution, then we need to purchase the licenses separately. The tool needs to improve its licensing."
"There is room for improvement in having the solution align more with standards. We're always shoehorning the product into the standards. It's not that it doesn't work for standards, it does. But Quick Start Policies are pretty close to what we need. The vendor needs to keep looking at GDPR, 27001, and 27701. That's why our clients buy the product."
"The deployment process should be clarified or made simpler. It would be helpful if the solution had in-app tutorials for users to look at as they progress through the system. Sometimes we get lost and need to go back to check what exactly the function was. There should be small hints around major key functions. It would go a long way in speeding up the deployment process."
"They are doing good for now, but they should start to consider tight integration with Mac solutions. There should be more integration with Mac. There should be Active Directory (AD) Bridging. Thycotic and Centrify have it currently because they merged and joined forces, and it was a feature available in Centrify. So, basically, they joined forces to create a kind of perfect product. If you have a hybrid or mixed environment with Windows and Mac, your Active Directory can only manage or enforce policies on Windows, but what about your Mac devices? How do you control them? So, AD Bridging will act as a bridge to bring all your Mac devices into your Active Directory. This way you have full control over your entire environment."
"What's bothering me, which is true of all of them, is that sometimes, the error codes that come up don't necessarily get reflected in the searches within their support sites or they're out of date. I would rather search by an error code than type in the text and search for it by text because the error code means that it is programmatic, and it is known. It might not be desired, but it at least is not unexpected. If you don't have an error code, you just get an anomalous error, and if it is lengthy, it can be difficult to search and find the specific instance you're looking for. This is something I would like all of them to improve. BeyondTrust, CyberArk, Centrify, and Thycotic could do some improvements in staying up to date and actually allowing you to search based on the product version. They are assuming that everybody is on their way to release. They put out a new release, but it is not reflected on the support site, which makes no sense to me, especially when they revamp all the error codes. They all have been guilty of this in some way."
"The tool is difficult to migrate."
"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 customer support and implementation services need to be improved."
"The product's stability is not easy to maintain."
"The company needs to do more to establish standard practices within the product itself that are common in the industry."
"Saviynt cannot customize based on customer needs."
"The UI doesn’t enhance the user experience."
"The solution is hosted on AWS cloud, and there is some dependency that affects our bottom line."
More BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is ranked 4th in Privileged Access Management (PAM) with 27 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 4th in Identity Management (IM) with 20 reviews. BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is rated 8.0, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management writes "Admin rights can be granted and revoked within minutes and that is what everything comes down to, for us". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Saviynt writes "Offers a good alerting system and integrates with SIEM solutions but main difficulty was the integration process". BeyondTrust Endpoint Privilege Management is most compared with CyberArk Endpoint Privilege Manager, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Delinea Secret Server and BeyondTrust Password Safe, whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Okta Workforce Identity and Microsoft Identity Manager.
We monitor all Privileged Access Management (PAM) 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.
