No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

EVOLVEUM midPoint vs One Identity Manager comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 3, 2026

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

EVOLVEUM midPoint
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
24th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
One Identity Manager
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
185
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (1st), Identity Governance Administration (IGA) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2026, in the Identity Management (IM) category, the mindshare of EVOLVEUM midPoint is 1.6%, down from 3.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of One Identity Manager is 4.2%, down from 7.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Identity Management (IM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
One Identity Manager4.2%
EVOLVEUM midPoint1.6%
Other94.2%
Identity Management (IM)
 

Featured Reviews

Ondrej Balun - PeerSpot reviewer
IAM Expert Group Lead at Ventum
An open-source solution that helps in IAM
Our customers leverage the product as a central component in their identity field management. The process involves connecting it to target systems through connectors. It also helps us in role-based access control implementation. Users are granted access based on predefined roles associated with their positions, organizational hierarchy, or job titles. Instead of direct assignments, users automatically receive roles upon entering the company, aligning with their assignments. The core feature of EVOLVEUM midPoint that I find most valuable is provisioning. Users, including myself, can submit requests that need designated individuals' approval. Additionally, the recertification feature is crucial for regularly reviewing and confirming the appropriateness of user access rights. I find recertifications valuable because they align with clear regulatory requirements for companies to perform them at least once yearly. Using the product, I can initiate a recertification campaign by selecting users and the applications to be recertified. I define the individuals responsible for approving or rejecting access. The goal is to ensure compliance with regulatory standards. The tool's flexibility in handling identity types and tickets has brought notable benefits. It provides full flexibility to extend attributes or the schema for users and organizations. Its audit and reporting capabilities have significantly enhanced our customer's compliance and security posture. Management's regular need for reports, such as the number of users in the application and identifying users with critical access, is addressed. The solution allows easy configuration of reports directly from the front end. Additionally, the ability to schedule and automate report execution, followed by automatic distribution to support or responsible personnel, streamlines the process.
Neha Chhangani - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Analyst at a startup based organization
Centralized identity governance has automated lifecycle management and simplifies compliance
One Identity Manager could be improved by making the initial setup and configuration simpler, especially for complex workflows and integrations. The user interface and reporting dashboards could also be more modern and intuitive with better out-of-the-box analytics. Additionally, clearer documentation and faster implementation guidance would help organizations get value more quickly. One specific challenge my team encountered was the complexity during initial configuration, especially when setting up custom workflows and role models which required more time and expertise. We also felt that out-of-the-box reports and dashboards are limited, and more customizable real-time analytics would be helpful. Better documentation and guided setup wizards would make adoption easier, particularly for teams new to identity governance tools. One improvement I think One Identity Manager needs is the enhanced self-service experience. The end-user self-service portal could be more intuitive with clearer guidance for access requests and password resets. Additionally, while integrations are solid, deeper cloud-native connectors and API-driven automation would help in hybrid and multi-cloud environments. A more responsive mobile interface or dedicated app for approvals and tasks would help managers who are often on the go. One more improvement is the built-in predictive insights or trend dashboards around access patterns and risk could improve proactive governance. More descriptive error messages and in-tool troubleshooting tips during setup configuration would reduce dependency on external documentation or support.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I like that it's open-source, and it's working. It has nice features, and it looks like it's easy to maintain."
"Our customers leverage the product as a central component in their identity field management. The process involves connecting it to target systems through connectors. It also helps us in role-based access control implementation."
"Because the product is automating processes, if somebody joins the company, based on his or her role within the company he or she gets proper rights and accesses to the target systems."
"The basic setup is straightforward and takes minutes to complete."
"This solution is better on the IT personnel, because now they spend less (or almost no time) managing user rights."
"The most valuable features include the automated attestations or recertification... The time that people have to focus on their real jobs and not spend it doing recertifications is huge."
"I like how One Identity Manager is designed. We can control granular-level permissions. Compared to SailPoint and CyberArk, we can go granular in the access levels. We can control it at the table, column, and database levels. That's the power of One Identity."
"One Identity Manager has positively impacted my organization in many areas because it provides a very secure environment with shorter turnaround time for user requests, improved management consistency, and better visibility into directory operations."
"One Identity Manager has improved operational efficiency, strengthened access governance, and reduced manual dependency across our on-premises environment, giving us faster onboarding and offboarding, fewer access-related issues, improved compliance readiness, and better visibility into our access management process."
"One Identity Manager is the tool I need, and I like it."
"One Identity Manager is very efficient for a limited amount of users, and it is easy to use and handle."
"The solution has helped us increase employee productivity when it comes to provisioning user interface systems, as our employees get everything that they need the day that they start."
 

Cons

"The support isn't ideal - because the product is open-source, it relies on your own ability to make it work unless you pay for support at a high hourly rate."
"One area where I see room for improvement in EVOLVEUM midPoint is enhancing the user interface for configuration. Currently, a significant portion of the configuration involves technical, XML-based settings requiring a higher level of technical expertise."
"I think that the product is missing some of the identity governance functions—for example, the legal stuff and GDPR, and so on. But I think they are currently working on it."
"They could make the product more user-friendly. It takes a lot of work to build technical and business cases with the product. The solution is more complex than you think to use."
"I would like to see more access management features incorporated into Identity Manager. Modern access management should have some built-in authorization features. Although these are present in the OneLogin platform, the cloud environment is not an option for every customer."
"The initial setup was complex. We have a lot of different systems. The journey from implementing to joining all the systems was difficult."
"Some internal structures are in place because of already depreciated functions back from the time when the solution was used for software deployment and as a help desk."
"They need to remove the dependency on VB.NET for backend development and they need to unify the front end."
"The system role manager, or some of the roles that are inside Identity Manager, are limited to one user. It would be more flexible if these responsibility roles could be attached to many people."
"The policy and role management features are a bit hard to scale. The whole model for who can do what and how to set it up is not so well-governed for a larger organization. The demos are always shown for a 100 or a 1000 people, but when it is a large number, it is quite difficult to maintain."
"Upgrading to a new version is consistently challenging and time-consuming."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Licensing is defined by the number of users."
"The product is free to use, but a cost is associated if you opt for official product support. Additionally, there is an option for a platform subscription, which entails professional services provided by the vendor."
"We're EVOLVEUM partners, and I tried it without a license."
"It's costlier that some other products, and there is nothing that fits every solution."
"The licensing for One Identity Manager is per user, per carbon life, specifically, it's per people, and not a per-identity licensing model. For example, if I have two hundred people, or if I have someone with several identities, I'm only paying for it once. I don't remember the exact cost of One Identity Manager because I wasn't the one who paid for the license."
"One Identity Manager's pricing is competitive and in line with what other companies offer."
"One Identity Manager is fairly priced."
"Its price is okay."
"One Identity Manager is cost-efficient."
"One Identity Manager has a reasonable price point."
"It's not cheap, but the pricing is okay. Other applications cost about the same."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity Management (IM) solutions are best for your needs.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
University
15%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business113
Midsize Enterprise33
Large Enterprise124
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Manager?
Pricing, setup cost, and licensing are handled by our management team, so I do not handle those aspects.
What needs improvement with One Identity Manager?
One Identity Manager could be improved with a simpler user interface and a better onboarding process. The platform is very powerful, but the learning curve is steep for new administrators and new u...
What is your primary use case for One Identity Manager?
Our main use case for One Identity Manager is identity governance and administration, which we have been using for about three years. We use it for automated user provisioning and de-provisioning a...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Quest One Identity Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

European Commisson, University of Illinois, First United Bank & Trust, Deutsche Telekom, Vodafone, Avast
Texas A&M, Sky Media, BHF Bank, Swiss Post, Union Investment, Wayne State University. More at OneIdentity.com/casestudies
Find out what your peers are saying about EVOLVEUM midPoint vs. One Identity Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
900,747 professionals have used our research since 2012.