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

IBM Security Verify Access vs Symantec Siteminder comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

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

IBM Security Verify Access
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
14th
Ranking in Access Management
12th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Identity Management (IM) (20th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (16th)
Symantec Siteminder
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
13th
Ranking in Access Management
15th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Web Access Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of IBM Security Verify Access is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Symantec Siteminder is 3.7%, up from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Symantec Siteminder3.7%
IBM Security Verify Access2.5%
Other93.8%
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Muzi Lubisi - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior technical Consultant at CA Africa
Improved user experience with seamless integration and easy installation
The feature that I mostly valued is the ease of installation on different systems, especially on Windows. Additionally, it is very beneficial for deploying single sign-on sessions between different windows on a web browser, provided I am connected to the right identity provider. That seamless integration significantly improves user experience and efficiency.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"I have found this solution to be really practical and when a user wants to log in, it is effortless and runs smooth."
"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."
"Its stability and UI are most valuable."
"IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"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."
"I really like the robust functionality that this solution offers, such as federation, OAuth, security, and multi-tenancy, just to name a few."
"If they want to have a secure, stable solution for a single sign-on that supports Java, ASP .Net, and most of the web-based applications, I encourage them to go with this product."
"It provides single sign on for our company’s intranet, so when you log in, you don't need to enter your name and a password, providing simple, secure access to company intranet sites."
"The authentication and single sign-on features of Symantec Siteminder are valuable."
"Using this product makes it easier for enterprises to integrate a majority or even all their apps into one single solution for access."
"The most valuable feature for us is the configuration feature; it permits us to connect our company to the offices of our subsidiaries, so when we buy a company we can connect their IT infrastructure to ours."
"If you look at our organization, and really all financial institutions, we have a lot of legacy apps. So it really helps to get Single Sign-On."
"It puts the expertise around authentication and security on our organization where it belongs."
 

Cons

"The user interface for users and administrators could be improved to make it easier. Automating some functions could also be beneficial."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications."
"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 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."
"Configuration could be simplified for the end-user."
"IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based."
"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."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"There is a considerable improvement in the product from previous versions, but a few items we feel need a little attention are the web agent installation process and steps – as it behaves differently on the same OS."
"It may be a good product, but I'd advise staying away from customizing it."
"Not great. The first level of support is not up to the mark or able to understand the actual problem."
"The Federation part of CA Single Sign On, it's a bit complex to implement because it involves the SSL certificates, exchange of certificates, and lot of technical details. The documentation misses some important parts of this, so that's the reason it took some time for us to go live."
"To add more value to this solution it needs to be more user-friendly."
"I would prefer to see their SAML integration be a more streamlined and easier interface, more like PingFederate's interface."
"Some of the features need to be improved. For example, the Federation feature."
"The technical support team is not very proactive."
 

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."
"Symantec Siteminder is expensive; they could definitely do better on the price."
"The solution's pricing is competitive."
"Siteminder is a little costly. You pay for licensing, and they offer packages, so if you have less users, then you have to buy different products at different prices. If you have more of a user base, then the package is different. They also include other features—for example, if you have a database and you're using Siteminder, then it's good to use a Semantic-specific database, but if you are using less, then you have to purchase the database separately. Whereas if you are going for a bigger license, then it comes within the package. It depends on which plan you are using."
"The price is quite comparable to the other enterprise-level solutions in that market."
"The licensing is fair for this solution."
"I recommend conducting a PoC on every available product before choose one."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"CA solutions are generally expensive but for the customer the ROI is big."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
11%
Outsourcing Company
10%
Construction Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Outsourcing Company
14%
Construction Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise69
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with Symantec Siteminder?
Symantec Siteminder needs to have adaptive authentication and multi-factor authentication as integrated features. Currently, multi-factor authentication is available as a separate solution, and it ...
What is your primary use case for Symantec Siteminder?
I deploy and support Symantec Siteminder ( /products/symantec-siteminder-reviews ). I have been a partner and reseller.
 

Also Known As

IBM Security Verify Access (SVA), IBM Security Access Manager, ISAM
SiteMinder, CA SSO, Layer7 SiteMinder
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

POST Luxembourg
British Telecom, CoreBlox, DBS, HMS, Itera ASA and Simeo
Find out what your peers are saying about IBM Security Verify Access vs. Symantec Siteminder and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.