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

CyberArk Certificate Manager vs Gemalto Protiva [EOL] comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 17, 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
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (8th), Certificate Management Software (2nd)
Gemalto Protiva [EOL]
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Featured Reviews

Karthik Kashyap T H - PeerSpot reviewer
Lead Engineer at a retailer with 10,001+ employees
Eliminates certificate expiration outages and offers good customization and reporting capabilities
Even though it allows for email editing, until version 23.1, you had to log on to the server, and the console itself used to take a lot of time. That has changed from the last release onwards. When you're defining the flow, there are some areas that can probably cause confusion to the users. If you want to rename the default field, you cannot rename it, which caused a lot of confusion during the initial days until everyone got settled in. Allowing the renaming or updating of the default field is something Certificate Manager can improve on. Certificate Manager has both the on-prem and the cloud versions, but 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. The maturity of the cloud version needs improvement. Additionally, when considering the on-prem version, there is a minor glitch in the system. When an administrator makes changes, they have flexibility regarding the approval flow. When dealing with a certificate that requires approval from several different teams, there is a minor glitch in the system where the name of the approver does not appear. This is a bug that we are currently addressing. Additionally, there is room for improvement in key management. Changing the default account name is not a straightforward process; it can be quite tedious. This is an area where improvements could be made. If there is a particular workflow that we want to tweak, right now, we can achieve it only via a PowerShell script. It would be great if they could also support a small Python script or anything to expand their scripting or adaptable workflow code base. Even though we can call another script from a PowerShell script, if someone doesn't have knowledge of PowerShell, that would be challenging.
PC
RAS Team Lead at Produban USA
A cost-effective solution, but the user interface lacks the ability to customize
In the UK, I think that we are one of the biggest utilizers of the service. With the restrictions that it has, I don't think it's got massive upscalability. For general users it is fine, but the scalability could be better. We started with approximately eight and a half thousand users, and we currently have about twelve-thousand people using it. This is used widely across a number of user groups, including administrators, end users, general users, and specific privileged users for two-factor authentication. We do plan to increase the usage of this solution. Our current capacity is fourteen thousand but we will probably grow beyond that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Venafi solved the issue of many misplaced internal certificates, as we know that at one place we can get all the information, and the problem of notifications about expiring certificates is resolved, improving our overall system for Expedia."
"Certificate Manager has reduced the certificate expiration outages to almost nil, and since 2022, we have had almost zero major incidents wherein we saw a financial impact or business disruption due to an expired certificate."
"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."
"It's definitely worth the money to have Venafi as a tool; it's definitely miles away from the competition, in my opinion."
"Certificate Manager's ability to help with compliance and regulatory requirements, including SOX and Swift, was great; this is a major selling point."
"The best feature I appreciate about Venafi is its user interface, which allows me to search for any particular certificate and immediately see the certificate details and expiry."
"We use Venafi for PKI certificates."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to use Active Directory groups as virtual containers instead of domains because it means that we can control our access groups better."
 

Cons

"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."
"Venafi's overall installation could be made easier."
"The initial setup is complex. You need third-party support or support from CyberArk Certificate Manager if you do not have a lot of skillset inside your own company."
"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."
"Venafi could enhance its offerings by providing more automation features."
"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."
"Regarding stability, I observed that in the last year, CyberArk Certificate Manager was down two to three times without any notification."
"The user interface needs improvement."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"Venafi's pricing appears to be competitive within the market."
"This is a cost-effective solution compared to some other products out there."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
8%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Large Enterprise13
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Venafi?
In terms of pricing, they are a little costly, but they are the best in the market today, so I would say they are worth every penny, rating them again at seven or eight.
What needs improvement with Venafi?
One area of CyberArk Certificate Manager that could be improved is the capability of integration with legacy applications. The initial setup is complex. You need third-party support or support from...
What advice do you have for others considering Venafi?
I would love to provide a review for one of the ones that I have experience with. With 15 years in the Identity and Access Management industry, I have probably used 20 different authentication syst...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Venafi
Protiva
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Surescripts, CME Group, TD Bank Group, Aetna, MoneyGram, Zions Bancorp, Cisco
Exostar, Sunrise Health Region, Baker Tilly, Seattle Children's, SEW-Eurodrive
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Cisco, Fortinet and others in Authentication Systems. Updated: January 2026.
881,733 professionals have used our research since 2012.