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

Opal vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Opal
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
20th
Ranking in Access Management
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (10th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
8th
Ranking in Access Management
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (6th), Authentication Systems (10th), Data Governance (19th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) category, the mindshare of Opal is 1.1%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 3.5%, down from 4.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ping Identity Platform3.5%
Opal1.1%
Other95.4%
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

Mohammed Mudasser - PeerSpot reviewer
AI/ML Engineer at a educational organization with 5,001-10,000 employees
Automated access reviews have improved least privilege and simplified identity governance
The best features Opal offers are automated access reviews, centralized visibility, and just-in-time access. I especially appreciate the ability to enforce time-bound access and automatically revoke privileges, which makes least privilege management much more practical. The automated access reviews have made the process much more efficient by giving us a structured way to review and revoke unnecessary permissions. Instead of manually checking every entitlement, we can focus on exceptions and higher risk access, which makes the review process more manageable and consistent. I would also add that the context Opal provides during access reviews is valuable. You can see the access relationship and risk rather than simply approving or denying it blindly. This makes the decisions more informed and gives the team a much better audit trail.
AmitRathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Analyst at Toll Holdings Limited
Single sign-on has simplified access while adaptive authentication protects complex user journeys
Regarding areas for improvement in Ping Identity Platform, there is not much. In terms of licensing and implementation costs, it has premium pricing, and it has a very complex implementation. It provides greater feasibility, but it takes a very long time in terms of complete building. There is a very limited number of legacy support, which can pose potential difficulties in integrating with certain older or legacy systems. Additionally, issue troubleshooting can be difficult at times. Sometimes issues can be difficult to diagnose and require extensive technical expertise. There is also a very steep learning curve for administrative purposes and potential difficulties with offline authentication scenarios.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Previously, my phone usage was around nine hours and fifteen minutes or more, but it has significantly reduced to around six hours and thirty minutes to seven hours, meaning two and a half to three hours has been reduced after using Opal as my primary screen time blocker."
"The clearest outcome I have seen is less manual effort during access reviews and better control over unnecessary or standing access, which improves the overall security posture."
"Opal has positively impacted my organization by reducing stress and increasing effectiveness for all our employees; it works better so all our employees have more time to sleep and they can investigate more."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
"Overall, I see PingFederate as a stable product and I do not see any bugs at the moment."
"PingID is very good, it's pretty stable as a product and we've never faced any issues, at least with the data applications integration, and the customers really like it."
"It is a scalable solution...It is a stable solution."
"Ping Identity Platform can provide a solution for both workforce identity and access management and also for consumer identity and access management, which is CIAM."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
 

Cons

"The core platform is already strong, but I would appreciate more flexibility in customizing workflows and access review policies."
"Opal can be improved in some ways."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"In the beginning, the initial setup was very complex."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"Ping Identity Platform is expensive."
"In terms of licensing and implementation costs, it has premium pricing, and it has a very complex implementation."
"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."
"The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"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."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The product is costly."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Comms Service Provider
13%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Educational Organization
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise22
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Opal?
The core platform is already strong, but I would appreciate more flexibility in customizing workflows and access review policies. Better reporting and analytics around access trends and risk would ...
What is your primary use case for Opal?
The main case I am using Opal is for identity and access governance, particularly managing application access and enforcing least privilege policies. I use it to streamline access requests, approva...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingFederate?
Regarding pricing for Ping Identity Platform, I would rate it eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with PingAccess?
The areas where I think PingFederate needs room for improvement include that the most significant area I would recommend is that things such as redirects still do not have majority of the applicati...
What is your primary use case for PingAccess?
The main use case for PingFederate is that we are maintaining the centralized single sign-on with DuroSengel and Carabras as the two main instances to review. If any application is hosted outside o...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Find out what your peers are saying about Opal vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
920,574 professionals have used our research since 2012.