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

Symantec Siteminder vs i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

i-Sprint AccessMatrix Unive...
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
27th
Ranking in Access Management
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (29th)
Symantec Siteminder
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
13th
Ranking in Access Management
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Web Access Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management is 1.6%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Siteminder is 3.0%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Symantec Siteminder3.0%
i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management1.6%
Other95.4%
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

NO
CEO at ABILITY LIMITED
A stable and scalable solution with reasonable pricing
The solution has high support capability.  The tool needs to improve its cloud service capability.  I have been working with the solution for 15 years.  I would rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.  I would rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten since it is highly scalable. We…
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior technical Consultant at CA Africa
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 feature that I have found the most valuable is that they are open to connecting with any token. For example, a year ago, we were looking for a soft token, and we started to look for alternatives. They are open to connecting with any token that we looking for."
"The solution has high support capability."
"The product is quite good, and from my point of view, it can serve our requirements."
"It helps protect our applications and provides identity management."
"I liked the debugging part. There are only two files (trace file and log file) that you need to look into while performing debugging, and the logs give you the exact info on where and what needs to be fixed."
"It has considerably reduced the amount of time that new users would take to join into the organization. Previously, it was a lengthy, manual process because it's a very secure environment, where they need to verify the user before they can actually grant him a user-ID and password. Integrating with the built-in custom application, and exposing CA Single Sign On to the internet, we were able to get the employees onboard. The time that we gained was: previously it would generally take from four to eight weeks for each employee, we brought it to one to two days."
"It's quite scalable."
"That seamless integration significantly improves user experience and efficiency."
"The valuable features are security in general and ease of use, more specifically ease of use for the developers, and security where the developer doesn't have to know about authentication or security."
"We needed to implement secure access, CA is a leader in this area, so we went naturally with the best, and we also chose CA because of the way they interact with customers, pitch new features to us, ask us for feedback, and provide us with support."
"It is a pretty complete product."
 

Cons

"The tool needs to improve its cloud capability."
"The user interface is not quite good and easy to use. There are a lot of menus, and the look and feel is not modern like a modern app."
"The initial setup was complex, painful. But that is to be expected of any new setup. When you're a big bank like us, any kind of migration to a new product is hard. I expect it to be painful, and it was painful. But it's not something that you can avoid."
"The initial setup of Symantec SiteMinder was a bit tricky. I would rate it a seven on a scale of one to ten, where ten indicates an easy setup."
"I think that one drawback to this product is that it's too big."
"We are finding some compatibility issues. We're still working with CA on them."
"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."
"All of the feedback within our team for CA Support is not good. It really is on a very low level, but then it is very specific for CA SSO."
"Identity Manager and GovernanceMinder should integrate better."
"Better documentation. I went through some sessions on single sign-on for version 12.7."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten. The tool's licensing is monthly."
"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."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The licensing is fair for this solution."
"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."
"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."
"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
22%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Outsourcing Company
15%
Construction Company
12%
Marketing Services Firm
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise69
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Symantec Siteminder?
Symantec Siteminder needs to have adaptive authentication and multi-factor authentication as integrated features. Currently, multi-factor authentication is available as a separate solution, and it ...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Siteminder?
I deploy and support Symantec Siteminder ( /products/symantec-siteminder-reviews ). I have been a partner and reseller.
 

Also Known As

AccessMatrix Universal Access Management
SiteMinder, CA SSO, Layer7 SiteMinder
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IRAS, Singapore Bank
British Telecom, CoreBlox, DBS, HMS, Itera ASA and Simeo
Find out what your peers are saying about Symantec Siteminder vs. i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,924 professionals have used our research since 2012.