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

Opal vs i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management 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:
 

Categories and Ranking

i-Sprint AccessMatrix Unive...
Ranking in Access Management
29th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (27th), Authentication Systems (28th)
Opal
Ranking in Access Management
20th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (10th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (19th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Access Management category, the mindshare of i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management is 1.6%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Opal is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Access Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Opal0.7%
i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management1.6%
Other97.7%
Access Management
 

Featured Reviews

NO
CEO at ABILITY LIMITED
A stable and scalable solution with reasonable pricing
The solution has high support capability.  The tool needs to improve its cloud service capability.  I have been working with the solution for 15 years.  I would rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten.  I would rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten since it is highly scalable. We…
Pranay Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior software engineer at Simplifyvms
Focused workdays have replaced doomscrolling and now reduce my daily screen time significantly
Opal can be improved in some ways. In the paid version, there are multiple features, but in the freemium version, there are fewer features. The blockage of the application can be more rigorous. Right now, if we play two to three games, then a math game or anything, we are able to remove that lock. It should be more rigorous in some manner, and for some applications, it should be more rigorous. Application-wise rigorousness should be introduced. The different modes are good, but they should be more customizable according to the person. The end goal should meet whatever the objective is, so if the person has used more than six hours, then it should remind the person frequently that this application has used this time and this is an application you should not use. It should give us a timer or some kind of notification that the person will not use it anymore.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution has high support capability."
"The feature that I have found the most valuable is that they are open to connecting with any token. For example, a year ago, we were looking for a soft token, and we started to look for alternatives. They are open to connecting with any token that we looking for."
"The product is quite good, and from my point of view, it can serve our requirements."
"Opal has positively impacted my organization by reducing stress and increasing effectiveness for all our employees; it works better so all our employees have more time to sleep and they can investigate more."
"Previously, my phone usage was around nine hours and fifteen minutes or more, but it has significantly reduced to around six hours and thirty minutes to seven hours, meaning two and a half to three hours has been reduced after using Opal as my primary screen time blocker."
 

Cons

"The user interface is not quite good and easy to use. There are a lot of menus, and the look and feel is not modern like a modern app."
"The tool needs to improve its cloud capability."
"Opal can be improved in some ways."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I would rate the solution's pricing a three out of ten. The tool's licensing is monthly."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
26%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Outsourcing Company
9%
University
8%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Construction Company
7%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What needs improvement with Opal?
Opal can be improved in some ways. In the paid version, there are multiple features, but in the freemium version, there are fewer features. The blockage of the application can be more rigorous. Rig...
What is your primary use case for Opal?
The main use case of Opal for me is to reduce my screen time during my work hours, during my wake-up time, and during my sleeping time to improve my focus and feasibility towards my work and my act...
 

Also Known As

AccessMatrix Universal Access Management
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

IRAS, Singapore Bank
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Opal vs. i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.