We performed a comparison between CyberArk Identity 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."I like the RBAC (Role-Based Access Control). It basically involves defining various roles, and then simply assigning those roles to users."
"I found the solution to be stable."
"The solution helps with auditing, and monitoring, and integrates with Splunk for log analysis. User activity logs are captured in CyberArk Identity and sent to external tools like Splunk for analysis and monitoring."
"If anyone makes an error, or if an incident occurs by accident, the business will not be harmed as a result of this activity."
"The initial setup of CyberArk Identity was straightforward."
"The user self-service program and the Office 365 provisioning service feature are the most valuable. It is a very easy and feature-rich solution that gives priority to the users and security."
"The most valuable features of CyberArk Identity are its ability to control access to administrative staff."
"The feature that we find most valuable is the ability to integrate multiple IDs for on-premises Active Directory."
"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."
"PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"The tool has issues with the third-party SMS gateway. The solution has its own SMS gateway. Integration support is a challenge when we don’t use their SMS gateway. The tool also needs to improve its scalability."
"We would like to see an improvement in the ability to manage mobile devices."
"They can include the Mobile Device Management (MDM) feature."
"CyberArk Identity's GUI is an area with certain shortcomings that need improvement."
"CyberArk Identity could improve by having the ability to better manage the network, such as Cisco. There seem to be some issues in this area."
"I'm not sure what needs improvement. It is a good platform."
"The solution's difficulty in gaining skill sets should be improved because it's a vertical product."
"In terms of general user feedback, the more security you put in front of a user, the more they complain. So usability and the user experience are always a challenge. So there's always room for 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."
"Notifications and monitoring are two areas with shortcomings in the solution that need improvement."
"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."
CyberArk Identity is ranked 9th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 17 reviews while PingFederate is ranked 10th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 4 reviews. CyberArk Identity is rated 8.2, while PingFederate is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of CyberArk Identity writes "Allows Linux and Unix administrators to login with single password ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of PingFederate writes " A highly stable tool offering extremely helpful technical support to its users". CyberArk Identity is most compared with Microsoft Intune, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, SailPoint IdentityIQ and VMware Workspace ONE, whereas PingFederate is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Symantec Siteminder, PingID, Microsoft Active Directory and Auth0. See our CyberArk Identity vs. PingFederate report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.