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

OpenText Privileged Access Manager vs Veza comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 29, 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

OpenText Privileged Access ...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
29th
Average Rating
6.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veza
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
23rd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
GRC (23rd), Identity Management (IM) (18th), SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) (9th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (7th), Identity Security and Posture Management (ISPM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of OpenText Privileged Access Manager is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veza is 1.5%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veza1.5%
OpenText Privileged Access Manager1.2%
Other97.3%
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

MB
Solutions Architect at IP Protocol INC
Has a useful credential vault feature but the user interface needs to be improved
I don't have a complete picture to be able to tell you that this is the best product. Because each customer in their own environment has a different set of circumstances and different situations that mandate different technologies. I cannot recommend this as the best product or recommend that you should use it. I would rate this product a six out of 10.
Guddeti Srikanth - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at Capgemini
Identity visibility has improved and access governance supports least-privilege decisions
I wouldn't say major drawbacks, but there are a few minor challenges and limitations to consider. Veza provides significant value for identity security and access governance, but one of the main challenges is the initial implementation and integration process, particularly in organizations with complex environments, multiple cloud platforms, and a larger number of applications.Connecting different systems and ensuring that identity and permissions data is collected accurately required careful planning, technical coordination, and collaboration between security, IT, and application teams. Regarding its governance and security, my experience has not been very comprehensive, but the security approach is valuable because the AI-driven security insights need to operate with a clearer framework of access control, accountability, and data protection.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Most valuable feature is the credential vault."
"Technical support is very good."
"In one dashboard or one place, I can see all the company's identity."
"It's the only current GRC vendor with licensing rights for HITRUST 11.3 framework, and I've avoided expensive HITRUST licensing costs through a custom control framework."
"Veza has positively impacted my organization by improving access for our users, allowing us to check the user and perform auditing for our system or organization, and we are now able to implement least privilege practices, which has made our organization and system more secure."
"One of its strongest features is the ability to provide a clearer picture of who has access to critical applications, cloud platforms, infrastructure, and sensitive data."
 

Cons

"The user interface could be improved, it's not that good,"
"Micro Focus needs a lot of enhancements. Actually, it's a good product, but it's not the best product."
"I wouldn't say major drawbacks, but there are a few minor challenges and limitations to consider."
"Veza can be improved as it is currently not suitable for small projects due to its high cost, complex setup, and requirement for more integration with multiple systems."
"In Veza, there is some scope for improvement, as I can see that custom integration is not easy."
"The support experience could be better."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
12%
Outsourcing Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Looking for recommendations and a pros/cons template for software to detect insider threats
This is an inside-out --- outside-in --- inside-in question, as an insider can be an outsider as well. There is no short answer other than a blend of a PAM tool with Behavioral Analytics and Endpo...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veza?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that the pricing is much higher and the setup is very complex.
What needs improvement with Veza?
Veza can be improved as it is currently not suitable for small projects due to its high cost, complex setup, and requirement for more integration with multiple systems. Additionally, there are no e...
What is your primary use case for Veza?
My main use case for Veza is to use it for authentication and to determine who can access what and what can be accessed by the system or organization users. We set permissions for cloud platforms a...
 

Also Known As

Micro Focus Privileged Account Manager
No data available
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Idira by Palo Alto Networks, One Identity, Okta and others in Privileged Access Management (PAM). Updated: October 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.