Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Auth0 vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Auth0
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
5th
Ranking in Access Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (1st)
Symantec Siteminder
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
12th
Ranking in Access Management
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
74
Ranking in other categories
Web Access Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of Auth0 is 9.2%, down from 11.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Siteminder is 2.9%, down from 3.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

Serge Wautier - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplified integration with helpful support and decent pricing
Auth0 is used as an identity provider for our new SaaS platform to manage the identity of users Auth0 is cost-effective because it provides all the features we need, and it was very easy to integrate into our platform. The documentation is comprehensive, and their support team is highly helpful.…
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved user experience with seamless integration and easy installation
The feature that I mostly valued is the ease of installation on different systems, especially on Windows. Additionally, it is very beneficial for deploying single sign-on sessions between different windows on a web browser, provided I am connected to the right identity provider. That seamless integration significantly improves user experience and efficiency.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most important feature for me was the ease of use, as it needed to be easy to integrate into my platform."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"It offers stronger security and flexibility with API keys, which are generated on runtime."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"It is very scalable. We have a very large customer base: 75 million customers."
"Symantec Siteminder has simplified user access for our customers from user login to their web applications."
"Ease of use is very good, for administrating it. It's very well known."
"It provides the breadth and the width to provide solutions for the different kinds of technologies which we have."
"The Directory is secure. It's our user store, and it's important to keep our members safe. The product does well with that."
"Symantec Siteminder Is both scalable and stable."
"The most valuable feature is that it meets the requirements of the customer. You have a lot of features in the product. Every product has them, but the question is, are these products going to meet the requirement of the customer?"
"It has the ability to authenticate and authorize users. It is the main feature for our security."
 

Cons

"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"I find it surprising that there is no access to a standard user profile."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"Better documentation for Salesforce integration is suggested."
"If you’re not a developer, you need to spend time exploring more."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"We would like to the OAuth be more stable, more issues being fixed rather than not."
"The maintenance cost has increased significantly, and we are concerned about this."
"To add more value to this solution it needs to be more user-friendly."
"While I have some integration with a few major providers, support for more would be advantageous."
"The support team could work on their response time and overall competence."
"They need to make configurations easier, and not have the engineer having to guess what will happen when he changes a particular setting."
"I'd like to see a rework of the user directory configuration."
"The support could be faster."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool is cheaper compared to competing solutions. Those alternatives tended to be more expensive. Consequently, Okta purchased it because it was considerably cheaper. The solution even offered some free services while still providing excellent functionality."
"There are different price levels: B2B, B2C, and enterprise. The basic plan is about $1,500 per month."
"Pricing of Auth0 is a pain point. Their pricing model is very confusing, at least for an enterprise. I don't like their pricing model. I think it's too aggressive. It's not very cheap for a service that only does authentication."
"It is a relatively inexpensive product in the industry."
"I am pretty happy with the pricing model of Auth0. It is very clear for me. Considering our scale, the features that we are using, and additional features that we bought, we still find it great. If you split the costs for the whole year and calculate the number of people you needed to hire, it always comes out to be much lesser than what we would have spent on building our own solution."
"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."
"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."
"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"The licensing is fair for this solution."
"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
36%
Insurance Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Auth0?
It is very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Auth0?
The cost of the solution itself was cost-effective enough that I didn't even need to compare it with EntraID.
What needs improvement with Auth0?
There is no immediate need for improvement. However, better documentation for Salesforce integration is suggested. Multi-factor authentication could be considered for future research.
What do you like most about Symantec Siteminder?
It's agent-based. It's convenient to deploy and integrate.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Symantec Siteminder?
When considering pricing, I have usually advised on the Microsoft solution, but compared to that, Symantec SiteMinder’s pricing is moderately priced. I would rate it a four on a scale where one is ...
What needs improvement with Symantec Siteminder?
I need to check the latest documentation, however, being able to expand or at least communicate with other identity providers to perform handshakes would be great. While I have some integration wit...
 

Also Known As

No data available
SiteMinder, CA SSO, Layer7 SiteMinder
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Airbnb 2. Accenture 3. Adidas 4. Atlassian 5. Audi 6. Baidu 7. BlackRock 8. Cisco 9. CocaCola 10. Dell 11. eBay 12. FedEx 13. Fiat Chrysler 14. Ford 15. Google 16. Groupon 17. Hewlett Packard Enterprise 18. IBM 19. Intel 20. LinkedIn 21. Mastercard 22. Mercedes Benz23. Microsoft 24. Nike 25. Oracle 26. PayPal 27. Pinterest 28. Qualcomm 29. SAP 30. Spotify 31. Tesla 32. Toyota
British Telecom, CoreBlox, DBS, HMS, Itera ASA and Simeo
Find out what your peers are saying about Auth0 vs. Symantec Siteminder and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.
845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.