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

CyberArk Certificate Manager vs Thales Authenticators comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 11, 2025

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

CyberArk Certificate Manager
Ranking in Authentication Systems
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Thales Authenticators
Ranking in Authentication Systems
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of CyberArk Certificate Manager is 1.3%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thales Authenticators is 2.4%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Venafi1.3%
Thales Authenticators2.4%
Other96.3%
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

Adam Goldstein - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates certificate management across platforms and has enhanced integration support
Venafi's automation capabilities were significant, as they allowed us to automate certificate rotation and deployment effectively. We integrated it with GlobalSign and aimed to automate DNS verification, although challenges remained. Venafi's platform-agnostic nature was beneficial for handling certificates across different systems like IIS, AWS, and Azure. It ensures centralized certificate management, which is crucial for compliance and maintaining best practices. It significantly improved our operational efficiency by automating certificate workflows. This reduced the number of certificates requiring manual management, freeing internal resources from deploying trivial certificates. While some complex certificates still needed manual intervention, automating simpler ones eliminated internal bottlenecks associated with tasks like uploading certificates to Imperva. By automating these processes, we reduced errors, streamlined workflows, and eliminated the need to repeatedly remember and execute complex procedures, ultimately increasing our overall operational efficiency. The automation capabilities are good; when properly configured, it performs as expected.
Gustavo Merighi - PeerSpot reviewer
Has an easy-to-use management interface and a straightforward initial setup process
Our primary use cases include multifactor authentication for VPN connections and access to security tools like jump servers and firewalls. We also use it to enhance security measures in an enterprise environment The most valuable feature is the YAML 2.0 integration. It has an easy-to-use…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Automating anything, whether on-prem or cloud, is possible."
"Venafi's automation capabilities were significant, as they allowed us to automate certificate rotation and deployment effectively."
"The support is definitely great. What I like best about Venafi is that it's very easy to get somebody on a call and get any of my questions answered. That's probably the biggest thing. Besides the fact that it's a mature product and it works, the support is a big deal."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their certificate discovery."
"We have reduced 80% to 90% of our outages with Venafi, which impacts the revenue substantially."
"Venafi is super stable, and we experienced no issues with its stability."
"The most valuable feature of Venafi is the automation that helps save time and reduce human error."
"The most important feature for us is the ease of use. If something is not available, we can develop our own scripts for it. We can create change management around this tool."
"The technical support services are good."
"We use this solution to log into virtual machines like VMware and VMware Horizon."
"Scalable and stable."
"One valuable feature is Thales' ability to provide off-site tokens."
"The most valuable feature of SafeNet Authentication Manager is authentication."
"I like how the solution allows me to support different types of hardware tokens and integrate with OTP."
 

Cons

"The product was really good when it was a Venafi product. However, since its acquisition by CyberArk, there has been a lack of significant innovations."
"The on-prem version is far more mature than the cloud version, which lacks a lot of features that the on-prem version offers, at least when we did the POC and evaluated the product."
"There are quite a few different technical aspects of Venafi that I feel they just missed out on; I'd have to look at my notes for the specifics."
"Currently, specific processes require manual installations due to the lack of built-in integrations."
"There's definitely lots of room for improvement with Venafi. They have a website where we can suggest new features, and they need to take that a little bit more seriously."
"Venafi excels in automating certificate rotation and deployment but could enhance its offering by improving support for hardware security modules like Fortanix and providing more advanced, out-of-the-box integrations with public certificate authorities for DNS re-verification."
"Venafi could enhance its offerings by providing more automation features."
"I would like to see included in the next release of Venafi integration with the cloud HSM's, Hardware Security Module. Additionally, I would say other cloud services, because it's not only cloud that's essential. If you have a customer that has a lot of their IT moved into cloud, integration with different cloud services is always an area to improve."
"The solution should allow for support of multi-tenant architecture."
"Lacks integration with other platforms."
"We faced issues due to slow ticket responses, which improved over time."
"The stability could improve."
"The product could be improved by adding more features for sending tokens via SMS or phone calls."
"The problem with SafeNet is that it's not integrated with Microsoft 365."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Venafi's pricing appears to be competitive within the market."
"The pricing model is complex, considering factors beyond the number of certificates. This complexity can make our payments to Venafi challenging if costs continue to rise. It is good but more expensive than the competitors."
"Thales is more expensive than its competitors."
"There is an annual licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
867,299 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Large Enterprise10
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Venafi?
We use Venafi for PKI certificates.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Venafi?
For our budget, Venafi's cost is moderate. It's not expensive as internal certificate generation is free, and we only pay for the public CA certificate signer and for storage in Venafi. With the to...
What needs improvement with Venafi?
As an end user, I cannot specifically point out improvements, but I believe it would be beneficial to display active certificates in a separate column on the UI, so users can easily find what they ...
What needs improvement with Thales Authenticators?
Currently, the solution fulfills our requirements. We are very satisfied with its features, and do not have any specific ideas for improvement right now. Perhaps, in the future, three-factor authen...
What is your primary use case for Thales Authenticators?
Our employees, whether working on-site or remotely, use Thales Authenticators for two-factor authentication to log in to their laptops or PCs. This is our primary use case.
What advice do you have for others considering Thales Authenticators?
From our past years of experience, the solution is very smooth, and we have had a good experience with it. We would definitely recommend Thales to others for its reliability and features. I'd rate ...
 

Also Known As

Venafi
Gemalto Ezio, Ezio, Gemalto Authenticators, SafeNet Authentication Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Surescripts, CME Group, TD Bank Group, Aetna, MoneyGram, Zions Bancorp, Cisco
Standard Chartered Bank (SCB)
Find out what your peers are saying about CyberArk Certificate Manager vs. Thales Authenticators and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
867,299 professionals have used our research since 2012.