IBM Security Verify Access vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle comparison

IBM and RSA are both solutions in the Identity Management (IM) category. IBM is ranked #21 with an average rating of 8.0, while RSA is ranked #22 with an average rating of 8.0. IBM holds a 1.3% mindshare in IAM, compared to RSA’s 1.2% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of IBM users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 60% of RSA users who would recommend it.

IBM Security Verify Access

Read 8 IBM Security Verify Access reviews

1,924 Views
558 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

RSA Identity Governance and...

Read 10 RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle reviews

854 Views
675 Comparison Views

60% willing to recommend

IBM Security Verify Access

RSA Identity Governance and...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 1, 2024

RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle and IBM Security Verify Access are competing products in identity management and security access. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle leads in integration capabilities and role management, whereas IBM Security Verify Access stands out for scalability and comprehensive security access solutions.

Features:RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle includes identity analytics, comprehensive access certification, and excellent data collection, making it optimal for complex user environments. IBM Security Verify Access offers multifactor authentication, seamless integration with cloud and on-prem environments, and a versatile authentication process, ensuring high security.

Room for Improvement:RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could benefit from simplified deployment procedures, user interface enhancements, and reduced need for specialized training. IBM Security Verify Access might improve by expanding mobile functionalities, streamlining its policy control features, and speeding up the integration process for custom applications.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service:RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle's deployment can be complex, often needing specialized skills. IBM Security Verify Access offers simpler deployment options with scalable cloud-based solutions and efficient customer service.

Pricing and ROI:RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle involves a higher initial setup cost but offers significant returns for complex governance needs. IBM Security Verify Access, while also requiring upfront investment, is seen to deliver better ROI due to flexible pricing plans and a comprehensive feature set catering to various business sizes.

To learn more, read our detailed IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 peers since 2012

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

IBM Security Verify Access

Ranking in Identity Management (IM)

21st

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Single Sign-On (SSO) (14th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (15th), Access Management (13th)

RSA Identity Governance and...

Ranking in Identity Management (IM)

22nd

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

5.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Identity Management (IM) category, the mindshare of IBM Security Verify Access is 1.3%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle is 1.2%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Identity Management (IM) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
IBM Security Verify Access	1.3%
RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle	1.2%
Other	97.5%

Identity Management (IM)

Featured Reviews

Ateeq Rehman

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.

Read full review

Harshul Nayak

Senior Project Manager at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

Streamline identity lifecycle management with intuitive interfaces and robust policy features

The functions of RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle, especially the IGA, are quite strong with their custom forms and workflows integrated. The user interface is very friendly and easy to use, making it a good product overall. However, it still has to be on-premise and the cloud version is not easily accessible, as dedicated instances are required and machines cannot be shared as multi-tenant for various customers. The advanced policy features of RSA definitely help in defining certain policies such as segregation of duties. That's particularly useful along with creating different access reviews. Regarding access control in simplifying access management, RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle has strong foundations of groups and roles, which help in defining all policies very easily. This makes it very easy to integrate with other access management tools or privileged access management tools.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."

"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."

"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."

"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."

"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."

"Its stability and UI are most valuable."

"It's a good solution for identification and access management."

"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."

More IBM Security Verify Access pros

"The data collection is excellent and easy to do. It does not require a lot of configuration nor does it require rules to be written like other competitors do."

"RSA Identity Governance and lifecycles are good for the access certification and auditing sections."

"The most valuable feature is the security, in particular, the One Time Password support."

"With the tool in place, you need to hire fewer people to provide access, and you have control over your processes."

"The user interface is very friendly and easy to use, making it a good product overall."

"Roles, connectors for provisioning and re-accreditation or reviews help greatly to govern user access."

Cons

"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."

"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."

"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. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."

"IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based."

"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."

"IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based."

"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."

More IBM Security Verify Access cons

"Technical support in Pakistan can be improved."

"RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle could improve out-of-the-box customization."

"Every connector that you have in the product needs to be custom-built, so there are not a lot of standard connectors available in the product, because of which there are a lot of hidden consultancy costs."

"This product is missing a lot of features which other competitors are providing. One of the key features that are missing right now is risk scoring. Additionally, there is not much scope for customization - everything is hard-coded and predefined, so it does not allow the developers to make many modifications."

"If you use the appliance version then it won't handle a huge database volume."

"The user interface and workflow need improvement, and more connectors would help."

"There are scalability issues. This product does not scale very well. It is not a good product for load balancing / active–active architecture."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is not expensive. It depends on the number of users."

"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."

"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."

"We are using the cloud platform, but we don't find it compatible to be served as a multi-tenant platform. This is a large drawback. It becomes expensive because it is then an all-dedicated solution. You have to have a separate tenant for each client, which increases the cost. The overall unit pricing can be less expensive than how it is right now."

"Pricing varies based on user count/number of modules you need."

"I rate the product's price a five on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity Management (IM) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Insurance Company

12%

Government

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

14%

Comms Service Provider

12%

Computer Software Company

Manufacturing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	6

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about IBM Security Access Manager?

The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via ema...

See all answers

What needs improvement with IBM Security Access Manager?

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle?

There is room for improvement with RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle. As the size becomes larger, the collections and unifications of the IDs process become quite slow, which can be improved fu...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle?

We provide RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle as a service, mainly to oversee the digital identity lifecycle, from the initiation to the off-boarding at the end of that digital identity. Our cli...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle?

Overall, I would rate RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle at an eight out of ten.

See all answers

Comparisons

Microsoft Entra ID vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 13% of the time

Okta Platform vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 10% of the time

IBM Cloud Identity Service vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 7% of the time

Ping Identity Platform vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 7% of the time

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs IBM Security Verify Access

Compared 7% of the time

More IBM Security Verify Access Competitors

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Compared 52% of the time

One Identity Manager vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Compared 22% of the time

Saviynt vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Compared 10% of the time

Fortinet FortiAuthenticator vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Compared 9% of the time

Oracle Identity Governance vs RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Compared 6% of the time

More RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

IBM Security Verify Access

January 2026

Download IBM Security Verify Access product report

Buyer's Guide

RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

January 2026

RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle report

Download RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle product report

Also Known As

IBM Security Verify Access (SVA), IBM Security Access Manager, ISAM

SecurID

Overview

IBM Security Verify Access is a complete authorization and network security policy management solution. It provides end-to-end protection of resources over geographically dispersed intranets and extranets.Provides a wide range of built-in authenticators and supports external authenticators.Provides permit and deny decisions for protected resources requests in the secure domain through the authorization API.Manages secure access to private internal network-based resources by using the public Internet's broad connectivity and ease of use with a corporate firewall system.

IBM

RSA SecurID provides world-leading two-factor authentication, protecting 25,000 organizations and 55 million users. RSA SecurID extends security to bring your own device (BYOD), cloud, and mobile as well as traditional virtual private network (VPN) and web portals. RSA SecurID solutions comprise three primary components: authenticator, platform, and agents.

RSA

Sample Customers

POST Luxembourg

NTT Com Asia, Virgin Blue, Bank of Uganda, EMEA Telecommunications Company, LAit (Lazio Innovazione Tecnologica), NyNet, OTP Bank, Red Bull Racing, Rupert House School, Signify, UK Local Authority, Bancolombia, Banco Popular de Puerto Rico (BPPR), TIVIT, Array Services, International Computerware, KPMG LLP, Moffitt Cancer Center

Buyer's Guide

IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

December 2025

Free Report: IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle

Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. RSA Identity Governance and Lifecycle report.

See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors.

We monitor all Identity Management (IM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.