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

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
8.0
Organizations experience significant ROI from F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager through cost savings, security improvements, and critical access availability.
Sentiment score
7.4
Ping Identity Platform simplifies identity management, lowers IT overhead, enhances security, improves efficiency, boosts satisfaction, and offers scalability.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.6
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager support is professional and helpful, but users suggest improved response times and communication.
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.
Most of the technical support is managed in-house due to our extensive experience with F5 products.
Even if they respond, they don't update me with the process or what's going on.
F5 technical support is responsive and helpful.
I have reached out to technical support for troubleshooting SAML certificate mismatches and federated errors between Ping and enterprise apps.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
F5 BIG-IP APM offers high scalability and usability for enterprises, with straightforward scaling and valuable traffic analysis tools.
Sentiment score
7.5
Ping Identity Platform offers adaptable scalability and performance, varying by configuration, environment, and server setup for different user needs.
The product's flexibility and company culture contribute to resolving these challenges.
I would rate the scalability of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) between seven and eight.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.0
F5 BIG-IP APM is highly rated for stability, enabling reliable remote work despite minor log issues.
Sentiment score
7.9
Ping Identity Platform is stable and reliable, with minor integration challenges and manageable issues, rated 8-10 for stability.
On a scale from one to ten for stability, I would rate F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) a ten.
Sometimes, the logs are not quite informational or easy to understand.
 

Room For Improvement

F5 BIG-IP APM needs improvements in usability, integration, documentation, reporting, and support to enhance cloud integration and competitiveness.
Ping Identity Platform needs enhanced authentication, integration, and user interface improvements for better security and user adoption.
If I could copy and paste objects instead of picking and configuring them from scratch each time, it would be great.
The main improvement needed for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is to integrate into the cloud-delivered services from F5.
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) does not have a direction for SaaS.
I would like to enable ServiceNow Generative AI for auto-diagnosing PingFederate SSO failures and suggest remediation steps.
 

Setup Cost

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager is costly but valued for its reliability; licensing is simplified, though cloud costs vary.
Ping Identity Platform offers flexible annual pricing, appealing for large enterprises, valued for security and efficiency over competitors.
F5 products are more expensive than other solutions but are valued for their quality and reliability.
 

Valuable Features

F5 BIG-IP APM offers a robust, scalable platform with secure remote access, customization, and easy integration, ideal for corporate environments.
Ping Identity Platform offers robust security with multi-factor authentication, seamless integrations, and customizable single sign-on for enhanced connectivity.
APM is quite flexible for customers to use, providing secure remote access through various host-checking conditions for both machines and users.
It provides robust security and offers integration with multi-factor authentication systems, which is crucial for an organization's security policy.
A lot of features are useful to me, including mostly the authentication, SAML, or SSO, with no sign-on.
The platform enhances security measures by analyzing multi-factor authentication attempts, highlighting suspicious patterns, and generating compliance reports.
 

Categories and Ranking

F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Man...
Ranking in Access Management
10th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
Secure Web Gateways (SWG) (17th), Network Access Control (NAC) (8th), SSL VPN (5th), Remote Access (10th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Access Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Authentication Systems (6th), Data Governance (8th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Access Management category, the mindshare of F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) is 1.9%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 7.8%, down from 10.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Access Management
 

Featured Reviews

Ashish Kumar Rai - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers remote access control, good GUI and easy to configure
I'd suggest improved documentation integration directly within the GUI. Right now, finding comprehensive documentation often requires going to external websites like the community portal. In the APM interface itself, they could add direct hyperlinks to relevant online documentation. This would provide easy access to admin guides and other resources when working within the GUI.
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 Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
11%
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 F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
In my opinion, the GUI is perfect with the configuration options provided. F5 BIG-IP has given customization options and policy configuration tools in the GUI. It's good and good enough to work.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 products are more expensive than other solutions but are valued for their quality and reliability, akin to purchasing a Bentley as opposed to an Audi.
What needs improvement with F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM)?
F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM ( /categories/application-performance-monitoring-apm-and-observability )) does not have a direction for SaaS. Most solutions focus more on remote access and acc...
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

F5 Access Policy Manager
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City Bank, Ricacorp Properties, Miele, American Systems, Bangladesh Post Office
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 F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.