No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ForgeRock vs IBM Security Verify Access comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 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

ForgeRock
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
9th
Ranking in Access Management
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
37
Ranking in other categories
Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (4th)
IBM Security Verify Access
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
17th
Ranking in Access Management
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (15th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Identity Management (IM) category, the mindshare of ForgeRock is 3.1%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of IBM Security Verify Access is 1.5%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Identity Management (IM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
ForgeRock3.1%
IBM Security Verify Access1.5%
Other95.4%
Identity Management (IM)
 

Featured Reviews

SR
Software Engineer at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Centralized access control has improved secure onboarding and supports strict compliance
I wish we had used ForgeRock's adaptive risk-based authentication, which allows dynamic adjustment of authentication requirements based on user behavior. This could have helped us further strengthen our security. Another hidden gem is the built-in support for custom authentication modules and scripting, which gives a great deal of flexibility to tailor authentication flows. The self-service capabilities for password resets and account recovery have been very helpful in reducing support overhead and improving user experience. Discovering and utilizing these features would have definitely made our integration even smoother and would have provided additional value for both our users and our security team. One area of improvement would be the user interface for policy and workflow configuration, which can become complex and sometimes unintuitive, especially for new administrators. A more streamlined and user-friendly UI would help reduce the learning curve. Enhanced out-of-the-box analytics and reporting would also be valuable, as our current options often require custom development or integration with external tools. While extensibility is a strength, documentation for advanced customizations and integrations could be more comprehensive and easier to follow. Improved support for seamless upgrades and backward compatibility would also help minimize downtime. In terms of performance, optimizing the platform for high concurrency environments would be beneficial, especially for organizations with large user bases or peak usage periods. Enhanced scalability features such as more granular or horizontal scaling options would provide better support for distributed deployments. For integrations, having more pre-built connectors and easy integration with modern cloud-native services would accelerate adoption. Improved monitoring and real-time health dashboards would help proactively identify and resolve performance bottlenecks.
Ateeq Rehman - PeerSpot reviewer
Unit Head System Implementor at Allied Bank Limited
Has improved secure user access while managing development through multiple technologies
I have already explained this in my previous call; I don't handle financial terms and commercials. Pricing is generally managed by functional teams and management looking after licensing matters. In Pakistan, vendors such as Oracle and IBM manage account relationships with clients and have tailored pricing models, so I do not have sufficient insights into that aspect.IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based. The complexity and scalability of the architecture necessitate in-depth technical knowledge and understanding of the system. Thus, installation is not as simple as clicking through; it requires extensive configuration of the underlying application servers, such as IBM WebSphere, where these products are deployed and configured.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The product is easy to use in a development environment."
"We used it to implement multi-factor authentication and to improve our security posture as well as reducing the potential for attacks."
"It secured our system so that it is accessed only by authorized people, and it implemented the SSO."
"The most valuable features are that it is easy to manage and it's stable."
"The support team is better than the other product we were using."
"We have found the identity and access management tools in the solution to be particularly useful for our organization."
"ForgeRock products are customizable, and the out-of-the-box features are solid, too. I primarily use the OIDC compliance features. It's just a configuration. it's easy to set up and customize trees. We can add our own features if necessary. Banks and corporations have different standards and specific validations."
"Even though we have very small business interests with them today, they see that we plan on growing drastically over the next two years. Therefore, we have excellent support and we are now at a point where we are not calling tech support. We pick up a phone and call the Account Manager and they'll get everything resolved for us. We don't have to queue along with everybody else and go through a long process."
"IBM Security Verify Access is providing a secure way of handling the user login journey, and secure user authentication is fully managed by ISAM or ISVA."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth; for legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users, and from the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"IBM Security Verify Access, formerly known as ISAM, IBM Security Access Manager, now renamed to ISVA, integrates with central directory services for our organization and provides user management functionality."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization and offers a good way to increase security."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
 

Cons

"The solution's documentation is not very good, and they do not give more details."
"The solution requires more simplified customization."
"I think the upgrade process is sometimes a little complicated and there are failures that occur."
"The solution's deployment should be made easier."
"This solution is extensively used, but we are not happy with the performance of the product or the customizations."
"Similar to other products, they do have some improvement scope in the documentation part."
"The solution requires more simplified customization. However, part of the problem is my clients determining their own preferences. Technology can help and do many things, but you have to define your own policies to ensure that the solution or service works within those parameters. Helping customers understand their business and different processes is another issue not relating to the functionality of this solution."
"ForgeRock is an open source solution and is available to everyone but it is not freeware."
"IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Its price is comparable to other products in the market."
"We have multiple clients we are looking at right now. We are at a very small number, however, the idea and the goal is to grow. We are looking at about $100,000 and $50,000 a minimum a month cost. That'd be minimum maybe in a couple of years."
"The license is purchased annually per user. However, you can negotiate if you are signing for a longer period of time. When comparing this solution to others on the market it is priced fair, it is not at the top of the price range or at the bottom end."
"Its licensing is on a yearly basis, but it also depends on the contract that you have with the vendor. They have multiple types of contracts. There are additional costs to the standard licensing fees. If you need some of the features, you have to pay more."
"The pricing of the solution is fair but I do not have the full details."
"It's a bit pricey and could be more competitive."
"ForgeRock is an expensive solution."
"ForgeRock's pricing is more competitive than other products."
"It costs about 300K AED for a year. Its pricing is a bit on the higher end, but in comparison to other products in the market, its price is still better. There are lots of other products that are very costly."
"The license and costs depend on the amount range of users you have. For just approximately 2,000 users, the price is practical and fair. However, when you have 20,000 users, it starts to become really expensive, and the discount per user is not attractive enough to go ahead and purchase."
"The product is not expensive. It depends on the number of users."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity Management (IM) solutions are best for your needs.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Insurance Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business15
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise18
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for ForgeRock?
The pricing, setup cost, and licensing are very straightforward, which is a good success. I appreciate that it is very straightforward and helpful.
What needs improvement with ForgeRock?
There are some areas I want ForgeRock to improve. These areas include policy configuration, documentation clarity, UI complexity, and debugging token flow. I want ForgeRock to improve in documentat...
What is your primary use case for ForgeRock?
I am using ForgeRock for standard support, policy configurations, and documentation clarity. The pricing, setup cost, and licensing are very straightforward, which is a good success. I appreciate t...
What needs improvement with IBM Security Access Manager?
I have already explained this in my previous call; I don't handle financial terms and commercials. Pricing is generally managed by functional teams and management looking after licensing matters. I...
What is your primary use case for IBM Security Access Manager?
We are still using the IBM BPM platform to automate the processes for our organization.I generally use Microsoft Project for project planning and schedule management, especially in relation to Orac...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Security Access Manager?
My current domain is leading project development, overseeing both technical and functional areas in process automation and orchestration, along with the hands-on implementation of process automatio...
 

Also Known As

ForgeRock Identity Platform, ForgeRock OpenIDM
IBM Security Verify Access (SVA), IBM Security Access Manager, ISAM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Geico, Thomson Reuters, Salesforce, McKesson, Trinet, SKY, BNP Paribas, Deloitte, Capgemini, North Western University
POST Luxembourg
Find out what your peers are saying about ForgeRock vs. IBM Security Verify Access and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
893,915 professionals have used our research since 2012.