We performed a comparison between Bitwarden and HashiCorp Vault based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Password Managers solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its integration capabilities and versatility, like the ability to securely save passwords and other critical information, make it incredibly useful."
"Having all the passwords in one place is helpful."
"I've found something else that is extremely valuable. Bitwarden refers to it as "emergency access". It's essentially a digital legacy where you can assign approved users who can request access. If you don't decline within a certain timeframe, they can access it in case you're incapacitated or deceased. When I last checked, only a few services offered this feature. Bitwarden had the simplest and best implementation."
"It is open source and the premium package is reasonable."
"The product has a very friendly community."
"In our organization, we use Bitwarden for managing product credentials. Bitwarden's collection feature enables us to securely create and store credentials, and we can easily provide team members with access to the relevant collections."
"The product is free and easy to use. It is well documented with an easy implementation process."
"The feature I find most beneficial in HashiCorp Vault is the secret engine. It integrates smoothly with many applications, making it easy to set up and implement quickly. This allows you to test it easily and see good results rapidly. When you integrate an internal API or application, it quickly manages that application's secrets."
"The most valuable feature of HashiCorp Vault is that it's an open source solution. Second, it's cloud agnostic, so it's very easy to maintain and control, which is why we prefer HashiCorp."
"This solution is easy to use and to integrate."
"The most valuable feature of HashiCorp Vault is the management of tickets in the pipeline."
"It is user-friendly and easy to implement from any application point."
"It's stable. I would rate the stability a nine out of ten."
"The interface is very simple to navigate."
"It would be ideal if the application could be seamlessly integrated into our open-source software, especially for the purpose of enabling straightforward logging."
"The solution should be made more secure as it has the banking sector and assets saved."
"The product must be a bit more unified and refined."
"Enhancing the tool by including additional security variables would be a valuable improvement."
"I often use another password manager as well to keep my passwords separate, ensuring redundancy. But one simple thing Bitwarden could improve is providing an option to duplicate credentials. Often, you're creating many sets of credentials for the same thing. If they all have the same information, notes, login, collection, and naming - all you're changing is the password. The ability to duplicate credential records quickly would be a big win. It doesn't do that right now."
"The product could be cheaper."
"In terms of features, the only thing that I found a little bit hinky was that there was no revocation or deletion on the model we were using. Once in a financial year, a client interacts, and you pay for that client for the year. So, there are just little things like that in the pricing. There should be more clarity around the end of the key. I know there is no system like this. They all are the same. I tested Microsoft, Google, and some others, and none of them really want you to delete a key, which makes sense. You delete a key, and you lose everything that it has wrapped or encrypted, but it's actually just a language. Deletion isn't really deletion. It's really revocation, but overall, HashiCorp Vault ticked all the boxes for us, and I couldn't fault it."
"The documentation is very general; it should have more examples and more use cases."
"I would rate the stability a six out of ten. There are some bugs and glitches. We are in touch with the vendor to resolve them."
"The solution could be much easier to implement."
"In my opinion, HashiCorp Vault could improve its user interface. Right now, they don't offer much in terms of a graphical interface, which means you usually have to manage things manually through API calls. I think CyberArk has a better approach because it provides a UI that integrates features across all its components, making it easier, especially for new users or those from organizations with strict licensing policies."
"The product is complicated to install."
"The solution's initial setup process is complicated."
"A drawback for some clients who have to be PCI compliant is that they still need to use and subscribe to an HSM (Hardware Security Module) solution."
Bitwarden is ranked 8th in Enterprise Password Managers with 6 reviews while HashiCorp Vault is ranked 3rd in Enterprise Password Managers with 16 reviews. Bitwarden is rated 9.2, while HashiCorp Vault is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Bitwarden writes "Good Documentation, reliable, zero failure and fast ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of HashiCorp Vault writes "Useful for machine-to-machine communication and has secret engine feature ". Bitwarden is most compared with Azure Key Vault, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault, IronVest, AWS Secrets Manager and Zoho Vault, whereas HashiCorp Vault is most compared with Azure Key Vault, AWS Secrets Manager, CyberArk Enterprise Password Vault, Keeper and BeyondTrust DevOps Secrets Safe. See our Bitwarden vs. HashiCorp Vault report.
See our list of best Enterprise Password Managers vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Password Managers 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.
