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

CyberArk Identity vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 27, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.7
Users report rapid financial returns and effective security with CyberArk Identity, though some lack familiarity to comment on outcomes.
Sentiment score
7.4
Ping Identity Platform simplifies identity management, lowers IT overhead, enhances security, improves efficiency, boosts satisfaction, and offers scalability.
By the second month, we started seeing the benefits and achieved a return on investment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.3
CyberArk Identity's support is praised for responsiveness, though some users report delays and desire more expert assistance.
Sentiment score
6.6
Ping Identity Platform's customer service is timely and knowledgeable, though occasionally slow for complex issues; self-help resources are commended.
They resolved the problem immediately after I reported it, on the same day, within one hour.
I have had conversations with them twice, and their technical support team was not that good.
There are times when there is a delay in handling my inquiries via email.
I have reached out to technical support for troubleshooting SAML certificate mismatches and federated errors between Ping and enterprise apps.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
CyberArk Identity is praised for scalability and adaptability, but faces challenges in performance, stability, and support at large scales.
Sentiment score
7.5
Ping Identity Platform offers adaptable scalability and performance, varying by configuration, environment, and server setup for different user needs.
We can use it on different phones and computers, demonstrating its scalability.
By addressing the issues I have highlighted, such as stability and making it bug and lag-free, along with improving customer support, they can enhance its scalability.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
CyberArk Identity is highly stable and reliable, though minor glitches and enhanced regional coverage could further improve performance.
Sentiment score
7.9
Ping Identity Platform is stable and reliable, with minor integration challenges and manageable issues, rated 8-10 for stability.
There is a timeout period that I do not like, requiring repeated verification.
When you have it in the cloud, you have CyberArk every time you need it.
With respect to stability, I find that stability is very good.
 

Room For Improvement

CyberArk Identity issues include complex setup, weak authentication, poor integration, difficult scalability, and inadequate technical support and customer service.
Ping Identity Platform needs enhanced authentication, integration, and user interface improvements for better security and user adoption.
Integration or deployment is extremely difficult for CyberArk Identity.
Something they could improve is the management of multifactor authentication.
It does not have global market penetration, and sometimes, there are support issues.
I would like to enable ServiceNow Generative AI for auto-diagnosing PingFederate SSO failures and suggest remediation steps.
 

Setup Cost

CyberArk Identity pricing varies among users but is valued for strong security features by medium and large enterprises.
Ping Identity Platform offers flexible annual pricing, appealing for large enterprises, valued for security and efficiency over competitors.
I compared it with other products, and it does not require a heavy investment.
The pricing is acceptable.
Regarding pricing, it can be quite a lot for small companies.
 

Valuable Features

CyberArk Identity offers robust security features and integrations at a low cost, enhancing identity management and operational efficiency.
Ping Identity Platform offers robust security with multi-factor authentication, seamless integrations, and customizable single sign-on for enhanced connectivity.
It impacts zero trust security strategies. It prevents lateral movements in the organization.
It protects our platform, application, network, and infrastructure resources on any device.
Being able to integrate CyberArk Identity with Microsoft Defender is valuable.
The platform enhances security measures by analyzing multi-factor authentication attempts, highlighting suspicious patterns, and generating compliance reports.
 

Categories and Ranking

CyberArk Identity
Ranking in Authentication Systems
8th
Ranking in Access Management
6th
Ranking in Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
Identity Management (IM) (11th), Authorization Software (3rd), Enterprise Password Managers (8th), User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (9th), Active Directory Management (9th), Cloud Resource Access Management (2nd)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Authentication Systems
6th
Ranking in Access Management
4th
Ranking in Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM)
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Data Governance (8th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of CyberArk Identity is 1.7%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 3.6%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

Julio Montero - PeerSpot reviewer
Access management system provides strong security and effortless user authentication
The solution can be deployed on cloud or on-premises. CyberArk is more on the cloud than on local hardware. The deployment is initially quite difficult. That said, when you are doing the implementation of CyberArk, there are so many tutorials that make the learning process very easy. The only complaint could be the language barrier. It's difficult if you don't have a very good level of English. Otherwise, it is very easy. You can have it set up within three months without much difficulty. It's hard to get started, however, once you get going, it gets easier. A full deployment takes half a year or less. There is some maintenance necessary. A company is constantly hiring and letting go of employees. The access is always changing, so access must always be adjusted. Or, if we need another law of filter, we would need to add those, or even take them away. That's another aspect of maintenance.
Dilip Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to use but requires improvements in the area of stability
In my company, we have worked on authorization, and I know that there are different types of grants. We have worked on the authorization code, client credentials, and ROPC grant. There are two types of tokens, like the JWT token and internally managed reference tokens. JWT tokens are useful for finding information related to the claim requests. Internally managed reference tokens are useful for dealing with visual data and information. For the clients to fit the user information, they need to do additional work to fit all the user info into the site, which is to define and validate the token issue and provide the request for VPNs. I worked on the key differences between the authorization code and implicit grant. In the authorization code type, you will have the authorization code issued initially to the client, and the client has to exchange it with the authorization server, like using a DAC channel to get the access token. In implicit grants, tokens are issued right away if the application is a single-page application. We can either use the authorization code or an implicit grant.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CyberArk Identity?
The integration capabilities, ability to integrate CyberArk into the overall IBB strategy of our current clients.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CyberArk Identity?
The pricing point is very good. I compared it with other products, and it does not require a heavy investment.
What needs improvement with CyberArk Identity?
It does not have global market penetration, and sometimes, there are support issues. CyberArk Identity can definitely improve on the IAM rules when I create them. The stability can also be better.
What do you like most about PingID?
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 logg...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?
The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.
What needs improvement with PingID?
The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.
 

Also Known As

Idaptive
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

MLB, Citi, Pfizer, SulAmerica, GE Capital, Shiseido
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 CyberArk Identity vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,686 professionals have used our research since 2012.