Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe vs Okta Workforce Identity comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 6, 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

BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets ...
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
42nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Password Managers (23rd)
Okta Workforce Identity
Ranking in Privileged Access Management (PAM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
68
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (2nd), Authentication Systems (6th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (3rd), Access Management (4th), ZTNA as a Service (10th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Privileged Access Management (PAM) category, the mindshare of BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe is 0.5%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Okta Workforce Identity is 2.9%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Privileged Access Management (PAM)
 

Featured Reviews

Stephen Hui - PeerSpot reviewer
Has all necessary functionalities, is sophisticated and mature; still contains some bugs
There are still some bugs in the solution but a lot less than there used to be. Unfortunately, CyberArk and BeyondTrust are in fierce competition. Many customers have already adopted CyberArk, but they need a proven remote access solution and are likely to go with BeyondTrust. Both solutions can be used, it's just more work for IT to manage them. CyberArk is still leading the market share globally, and BeyondTrust is always classified second, followed by Delinea or Thycotic.
Tor Nordhagen - PeerSpot reviewer
Extremely easy to work with, simple to set up, and reasonably priced
The drawback of this solution is that in our shops, many staff members sometimes have to be borrowed from one shop to another and the solution does not really support having multiple roles. The user experience we would like to have when a person works in shop A which pays their salary is that they should have access to pretty much everything. Maybe you have somebody who is a manager in that shop A, he should be able to order new wear, he should be able to change the pricing, he should be able to empty the cash registry, and ship it to the bank. But when for instance, in COVID, people had to fill in for people in shops where a lot of people were sick, then they had to actually use user accounts of people that work in shop B. If you were employed in shop A, you could not work in shop B without borrowing somebody else's user ID and password. Which is really bad. We haven't been able to work around that and Okta Workforce Identity does not have a solution for it. We are now piloting their identity governance solution. Obviously, it's easy to give somebody access, give them an account, and give them roles, but it's hard to maintain that. For example, if you moved from, say working in a shop to working in a warehouse. But why do you still have all this shop access? The solution has until now not had anything to really support the process of taking away access. But now we are in a better release program of Okta's identity governance solution. Although it's very basic, the solution has started on a journey, but identity governance is something that Okta Workforce Identity really needs to improve. The ability or the options in the solution for changing the look and feel are not good enough because in our partner portal, essentially what they have is an ugly admin interface. The admin interface is good enough for us technical people because that's all we need. We work with the product and we're able to see the data but when it comes to presenting the service portal, Okta Workforce Identity does not have any capabilities really for making it look pretty. To add branding and different graphical user interface elements than Okta basic for essentially delegated admin for the business-to-business portal is horrifying because you're essentially using the tech admin. The only option we had and used, was to take the tech admin console and strip it. so that a vendor that has some goods that are sold in the shops, when they want to add a user on their side, say a driver or a packer on their side who should know how much they've packed in a truck to come to our warehouse, then the user interface that this vendor is using, these functional people will then have to use an extremely basic user interface.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The local administrator can manage all the user's logins in one, simple, straight-away account access. Additionally, the solution is user-friendly."
"A sophisticated and mature solution."
"The most valuable features of BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe are the ease of use and the API is very nice. Additionally, the interface is very good between AD and Unix."
"DevOps Secrets Safe allows you to customize a lot of rules."
"Okta integrates well with other solutions. Once you have integrated an application into Okta and onboarded a user, they will be onboarded for just-in-time provisioning."
"I find the provisioning features and the integration with other applications useful."
"It is flexible and easy to install."
"You can only log in if you have the access, which protects the applications by avoiding cross-site scripting."
"One of the most beneficial features of the solution is the user provisioning and the de-provisioning feature."
"The most useful features of Okta for my organization are identity and access management, single sign-on, and the flexibility for hybrid setups."
"Okta has introduced the Universal Directory. It has custom attribute capability and user permissions to read/write on their profiles or hide them. Profile sources and identity profile sourcing are two different components that I haven't seen in other products."
"It's reliable and it does what it is advertised to do."
 

Cons

"You need to improvise many of the customized rules, which can lead to some errors. BeyondTrust should reduce the error rate."
"We had some issues with the solution and once we contacted support they eventually solved the problem. They could improve their response time."
"The product contains some bugs."
"The support for the solution is not very good, they could improve by being quicker."
"On the admin side, we can create our own passwords instead of generating one, which is usually difficult to explain to a user."
"Whenever I write Cypress test cases, we encounter problems with logging in through Okta."
"The ability or the options in the solution for changing the look and feel are not good enough because in our partner portal, essentially what they have is an ugly admin interface."
"Its pricing needs improvement."
"We had an issue with the Okta Workforce Identity dashboard once in 2023 when we had an outage, but it recovered in a few minutes."
"We faced some challenges during the Okta Identity Workforce deployment. Integrating with AWS and other cloud services posed some limitations with federated options. For instance, features like automatic user addition from AWS to the tool were missing, requiring manual intervention. The API is limited compared to the manual configuration possible through the UI."
"Okta should have at least a local peering partner for countries that align with or comply with GDPR, so there are no compliance or audit questions."
"The guest user access could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"There is an annual license required to use BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The price of Okta Workforce Identity is reasonable."
"License is around US$20,000 annually."
"Though I don't know about the licensing model of the product, I wouldn't be surprised if Okta offers a per user license subscription model."
"It has a yearly subscription. As compared to its competitors, it is quite expensive. It also has a complex licensing model."
"The product is expensive compared to other vendors."
"This is an expensive solution but the security makes it worthwhile."
"Workforce Identity is well-priced."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Privileged Access Management (PAM) solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Government
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What do you like most about Okta Workforce Identity?
Okta has introduced the Universal Directory. It has custom attribute capability and user permissions to read/write on their profiles or hide them. Profile sources and identity profile sourcing are ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Okta Workforce Identity?
Pricing for Okta is reasonably not that much, however, I don't have access to the commercial aspect.
What needs improvement with Okta Workforce Identity?
Areas for improvement with Okta Workforce Identity would be in the governance place; for me, it is light. Okta is mostly focused on execution and runtime, which means maintaining authentication and...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Starbucks, Ebay, CSC, RBC, Williams-Sonoma, Carbonite
FedEx, Zoom, Takeda, Lululemon Athletica, GrunHub, jetBlue, McKensson, Bain & Company, Engie, Peloton, Sonos, T-Mobile, Hewlett Packard, MGM Resorts, Ally Financial, Priceline, Albertsons, Itercom, Classy, FICO, Kensho, Live Nation, Drata, Rotary, and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe vs. Okta Workforce Identity and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.