We performed a comparison between IBM Security Verify Access and Saviynt based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most relevant feature is Omada's reporting engine. Omada never 'forgets' and archives every process. All steps an admin, user, or manager has executed, are recorded in Omada."
"The administrative features and SoD are valuable."
"The most valuable functionality of the solution for us is that when employees stop working for the municipality, they are automatically disabled in Active Directory. Omada controls that 100 percent. They are disabled for 30 days, and after that time Omada deletes the Active Directory account. The same type of thing happens when we employ a new person. Their information is automatically imported to Omada and they are equipped with the roles and rights so they can do their jobs."
"We don't have to go in and do a lot of the work that we did before. It may have saved us somewhere in the range of 10 to 30 percent of the time we spent on provisioning access."
"I'm not using Omada, but the interface is easy to use and gives you a solid overview of your identities."
"Omada's onboarding features reflect our processes for onboarding new employees well. That is the primary reason we use this solution. We use role-based access control. I'm not sure how much it has improved our security posture, but it's made managing identities more convenient."
"For me, the best feature of Omada Identity is its web interface because it's really easy for users to understand."
"We are able to onboard new user accounts much faster by automating the process and standardizing our operations globally. Previously, there were many individual processes and manual admin interactions. We also see a lot of cost savings and benefits because through automation and standardization."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization. It offers a good way to increase security."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"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."
"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. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"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."
"Saviynt has better integration with enterprise systems like SAP, Microsoft, Adobe, and AWS."
"Saviynt risk-based access requests and intelligent access controls have made a significant impact on our company."
"The product is flexible to use."
"One of the tool's advantages is its user-friendly interface, making it easier to manipulate from a GUI perspective. The graphical user interface for users and administrators is straightforward. While it may require more configuration initially, once set up, it becomes more accessible and easier to use."
"Some of the self-service capabilities are quite powerful."
"Saviynt has a lot of potential with many features available for users."
"It is a flexible tool because it works on JSON."
"It's easy to manage and easy to use; a simple tool for end-users."
"The user interface should have a more flexible design, where you can change it to your requirement."
"The Omada support response time has room for improvement."
"I would like more training. As someone who is new to this world, I don't feel that the courses Omada provides are good enough. They should also improve the documentation. It is difficult to learn how to use the solution by yourself"
"The web GUI can be improved."
"The UI design needs improvement. One or two years ago, Omada changed its user interface to simplify, but the simplification has not really kicked in."
"It is not possible to customize reports on Omada Identity."
"Omada's reporting functionality is limited and could benefit from greater customization."
"In our organization, all the data is event-driven, which means that if an attribute is changed in the source system, it can be updated within a few seconds in all end-user systems. There is room for improvement in Omada regarding that. Omada is still batch-based for some processes, so sometimes it can take an hour or even four hours before the execution is run and the update is sent."
"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."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"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."
"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."
"The company needs to do more to establish standard practices within the product itself that are common in the industry."
"The main difficulty was the integration process itself. But we were able to kind of work through it and fix it. We tried integrating with our HR system and other IBM solutions, like Microsoft Identity Management."
"The solution does not work very well as the number of users increases."
"It is time-consuming to troubleshoot issues."
"The product's stability is not easy to maintain."
"The solution is hosted on AWS cloud, and there is some dependency that affects our bottom line."
"UI and support could be improved. The frequent updates and version changes can be disruptive for large organizations. Not every month, a large organization can go with the changes. Saviynt needs to consider this carefully."
"The product lacks a broad user base which makes it difficult sometimes to find answers to questions about the product."
IBM Security Verify Access is ranked 17th in Identity Management (IM) with 7 reviews while Saviynt is ranked 5th in Identity Management (IM) with 21 reviews. IBM Security Verify Access is rated 7.8, while Saviynt is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of IBM Security Verify Access writes "Supports on-prem and cloud environments, has good integration capabilities, and is easy to adopt". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Saviynt writes "Used for IAM, IGA, MFA, SSO, and access management". IBM Security Verify Access is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas Saviynt is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Okta Workforce Identity and Oracle Identity Governance. See our IBM Security Verify Access vs. Saviynt 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.
