IBM Security Verify Access vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

IBM and Ping Identity are both solutions in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category. IBM is ranked #14 with an average rating of 8.0, while Ping Identity is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.2. IBM holds a 2.2% mindshare in SSO, compared to Ping Identity’s 8.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ping Identity users who would recommend it.

IBM Security Verify Access

Read 7 IBM Security Verify Access reviews

821 Views
550 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ping Identity Platform

Read 28 Ping Identity Platform reviews

3,455 Views
2,445 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

IBM Security Verify Access

Ping Identity Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Ping Identity Platform and IBM Security Verify Access are leading solutions in the identity and access management space. User reviews indicate that IBM provides better policy enforcement and security measures.

Features: Ping Identity Platform offers seamless integration capabilities, advanced authentication mechanisms, and versatile deployment options. IBM Security Verify Access provides comprehensive policy enforcement, robust security protocols, and flexible access controls.

Room for Improvement: Users suggest Ping Identity Platform improve its reporting functionalities, administration process, and user interface. IBM Security Verify Access needs improvements in simplified deployment, better documentation, and user onboarding.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Ping Identity Platform is known for its straightforward deployment model but lacks responsive customer service. IBM Security Verify Access has complex deployment but offers effective customer support when needed.

Pricing and ROI: Ping Identity Platform has a higher initial setup cost but offers competitive ROI due to its efficiency and feature set. IBM Security Verify Access is relatively cost-effective to set up and delivers satisfactory ROI driven by its comprehensive features.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform Report (Updated: February 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform

February 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 845,406 peers since 2012

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

IBM Security Verify Access

Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)

14th

Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

19th

Ranking in Access Management

13th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Identity Management (IM) (25th)

Ping Identity Platform

Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)

4th

Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

6th

Ranking in Access Management

4th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Authentication Systems (6th), Data Governance (8th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of IBM Security Verify Access is 2.2%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 8.0%, down from 10.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Single Sign-On (SSO)

Featured Reviews

AsifIqbal

Chief Information Security Officer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees

Has good scalability and is stable with no glitches; has a multi-factor authentication feature

What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain.

Read full review

Dilip Reddy

Ping Engineer at Equitable

Easy to use but requires improvements in the area of stability

In my company, we have worked on authorization, and I know that there are different types of grants. We have worked on the authorization code, client credentials, and ROPC grant. There are two types of tokens, like the JWT token and internally managed reference tokens. JWT tokens are useful for finding information related to the claim requests. Internally managed reference tokens are useful for dealing with visual data and information. For the clients to fit the user information, they need to do additional work to fit all the user info into the site, which is to define and validate the token issue and provide the request for VPNs. I worked on the key differences between the authorization code and implicit grant. In the authorization code type, you will have the authorization code issued initially to the client, and the client has to exchange it with the authorization server, like using a DAC channel to get the access token. In implicit grants, tokens are issued right away if the application is a single-page application. We can either use the authorization code or an implicit grant.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Its stability and UI are most valuable."

"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."

"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."

"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."

"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."

"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."

"It's a good solution for identification and access management."

"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."

"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."

"The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logging in."

"The soundness of the solution is its most valuable feature. For example, if you are in our corporate network, you can log on without any traffic interfering."

"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."

"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"I like the self-service feature. The 502 and UBP systems are also excellent. PingID's ability to authenticate with SSH, RDP, and Windows login is pretty handy. It covers the entire spectrum of use."

"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."

More Ping Identity Platform pros

Cons

"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."

"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."

"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."

"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."

"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."

"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."

"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."

"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."

"It has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."

"Ping Identity Platform must improve its UI since its management console is complicated."

"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."

"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."

"The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it."

"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."

"One significant challenge was ensuring smooth user migration during system upgrades in Ping."

More Ping Identity Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It costs about 300K AED for a year. Its pricing is a bit on the higher end, but in comparison to other products in the market, its price is still better. There are lots of other products that are very costly."

"The product is not expensive. It depends on the number of users."

"The license and costs depend on the amount range of users you have. For just approximately 2,000 users, the price is practical and fair. However, when you have 20,000 users, it starts to become really expensive, and the discount per user is not attractive enough to go ahead and purchase."

"PingID pricing is a ten out of ten because it's a little bit cheaper than other tools, such as Okta and ForgeRock, and supports multiple tools."

"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."

"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."

"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."

"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."

"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."

"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."

"The tool is quite affordable."

More Ping Identity Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Insurance Company

17%

Computer Software Company

10%

Government

10%

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Educational Organization

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Security Access Manager?

The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via ema...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Security Access Manager?

The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering IBM Security Access Manager?

I rate the product an eight out of ten.

See all answers

What do you like most about PingID?

The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logg...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?

The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.

See all answers

What needs improvement with PingID?

The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.

See all answers

Comparisons

Oracle Access Manager vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 25% of the time

Microsoft Entra ID vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 10% of the time

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 9% of the time

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 8% of the time

ForgeRock vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 8% of the time

More IBM Security Verify Access Competitors

Microsoft Entra ID vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 22% of the time

Symantec Siteminder vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 11% of the time

ForgeRock vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 7% of the time

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

Auth0 vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 4% of the time

More Ping Identity Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

March 2025

Download IBM Security Verify Access product report

Buyer's Guide

Ping Identity Platform

March 2025

Download Ping Identity Platform product report

Also Known As

IBM Security Verify Access (SVA), IBM Security Access Manager, ISAM

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ

Overview

IBM Security Verify Access is a complete authorization and network security policy management solution. It provides end-to-end protection of resources over geographically dispersed intranets and extranets.Provides a wide range of built-in authenticators and supports external authenticators.Provides permit and deny decisions for protected resources requests in the secure domain through the authorization API.Manages secure access to private internal network-based resources by using the public Internet's broad connectivity and ease of use with a corporate firewall system.

IBM

IDENTITY DEFINED SECURITY PLATFORM delivers a unified, standards-based platform that can be deployed as SaaS, software or both and can scale to handle millions of identities. From multi-factor authentication and single sign-on to access security, directory and data governance, our capabilities work together to give employees, partners and customers secure access to cloud, mobile and enterprise applications, securing and streamlined everything from sign-on to sign-off and everywhere in between.

Ping Identity

Sample Customers

POST Luxembourg

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol

Buyer's Guide

IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform

February 2025

Free Report: IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: February 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

845,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform report.

See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors, best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors, and best Access Management 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.