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

Idira IGA vs OpenText Identity Manager comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 2, 2026

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

Linx Security
Sponsored
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
19th
Ranking in Identity Governance Administration (IGA)
8th
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (10th), Access Management (17th), Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (10th), Identity Security and Posture Management (ISPM) (4th)
Idira IGA
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
6th
Ranking in Identity Governance Administration (IGA)
5th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th)
OpenText Identity Manager
Ranking in Identity Management (IM)
15th
Ranking in Identity Governance Administration (IGA)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
18
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (9th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Identity Management (IM) category, the mindshare of Linx Security is 0.3%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Idira IGA is 1.9%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText Identity Manager is 1.9%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Identity Management (IM) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Idira IGA1.9%
OpenText Identity Manager1.9%
Linx Security0.3%
Other95.9%
Identity Management (IM)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2865900 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior VP, CISO at a real estate/law firm with 201-500 employees
Identity governance has unified access control and now cuts audit workload across the company
The layer that I hear from my employees the most is pretty recent, I would say, maybe nine or ten months ago. That is the AI assistant, which I mean I am in this industry a long time and I am used to the fact you always need to go and learn query languages and work with professional services to understand pretty basic questions. Today, you can use the platform to run simple text questions. My employees talk about that as a cloud within Linx Security. The ease of use of asking questions and also asking the platform to take action is something that was very new to us. One of the things we were doing with that is automating our user access reviews through a very simple dashboard instead of working on our spreadsheets. That was a big benefit for us in the past year. It helped me reduce man-hours when it comes to analyzing the access. Once we were starting also to implement the user access reviews, that of course, reduced the man-hours. That is the main area at the beginning. I also got much better visibility on the overall posture of my identities, and I am being asked by auditors or cyber insurance reports to provide where we are on users. That gave me a very good place to be with my board and auditors. I would say reducing the work on my team was significant. There was also a point in time in which we were able to reduce the number of licenses that we are using on some applications, which was also a cost reduction. Nowadays, I mentioned the agents part, we are being asked about our controls around that area. Having a tool that can give some value in these areas gives me a lot of confidence and also our leadership that we are deploying agents in a responsible way. What gave them the perfect score, and I have been using other platforms in the past, is the fact that I can use one platform to cover humans, non-humans, and now agents. On the cost side, I feel I am making a good financial decision. On top of that, I would say that they are very quick to provide new features, to respond to our tickets. It seems that at least in the past two to three years, they were providing cutting-edge solutions.
Sasikiran Sakalabattina - PeerSpot reviewer
V Mware And Vector Administration at Tech Mahindra Limited
Automated lifecycle governance has reduced manual access work and strengthens audit readiness
CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla significantly reduces manual access management efforts due to day-to-day activities. RBAC and role mining actually reduce manual access management efforts significantly. RBAC is the best feature, and it provides AI capabilities. The second feature I value most is identifying lifecycle management for joiner, mover, and leaver scenarios. CyberArk IGA Powered by Zilla has one feature that provides strong access reviews, compliance reports, automation, and audit readiness with centralized governance. Centralized governance means we can handle everything at one point, making it a very strong feature. This is integrated with another feature such as SaaS integrations for strong security posture and faster provisioning with reduced operational overhead. These are the four features I value most, and with all my three years of experience, I use and appreciate these four features most. The impact of automation on my access reviews is that it automates the provisioning and de-provisioning. If I were to perform manual tasks such as provisioning and de-provisioning without automation, it would require a lot of time to handle. With this automation, we easily accomplish provisioning or de-provisioning. We simply get the Active Directory users and create the VPNs, cloud, and enterprise applications without any manual intervention. AI-driven role management and RBAC automation significantly reduce service tickets. Without automation, I would need to handle tickets, which involve a lot of manual work and requires additional manual employees. Without automation, this leads to approval delays and manual access assignment efforts. Automated access reviews provide simple audit reports, and by complying with the report, it improves audit readiness while reducing operational workload for IT and security teams.
reviewer2401464 - PeerSpot reviewer
Architect at a consultancy with 51-200 employees
Updates systems quickly and does not have a limit on the number of users
NetIQ does not have a limit on the number of users. The tool is secure by nature. It can have more than one billion users. Event-based systems know what has to be changed. SQL-based systems can only change using time and date. Event-based systems provide immediate results, while SQL-based systems need time to sync. It is totally different from a security perspective. Event-based systems can update all the systems in seconds or minutes. Other systems do it within 24 hours. The basic event-based system is AI-driven. It has some kind of robotics and programming. Other tools need programming. I like systems that have prebuilt ideas of security. NetIQ has been in the market for a long period. It has all the systems and connectors. There is not much coding. We just need to configure the products. We need not do any programming. I haven't seen any other product that needs only configuration to do the job. Most products in the market are SQL-based. They need programming. Some service providers who sell other products to customers do not sell NetIQ because they can make more money by selling solutions that need more consultancy and programming. More hours lead to more money.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity Management (IM) solutions are best for your needs.
904,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
19%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Construction Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Security Firm
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
6%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Linx Security?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing was that pricing was very fair and they reduced the overall TCO...
What needs improvement with Linx Security?
There is nothing I can think of for improvement regarding Linx Security. I would not like to add more about needed im...
What is your primary use case for Linx Security?
Linx Security is my main tool for governing and securing human identities and agents. I manage the full life cycle of...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Zilla Security?
Pricing-wise, I find Idira IGA very competitive compared to other IGA tools available in the market.
What needs improvement with Zilla Security?
Idira IGA platform itself is somewhat complex to understand initially, so the UI and user interface could be simplifi...
What is your primary use case for Zilla Security?
Idira IGA serves as a unified platform combining IAM, PAM, IGA, and machine identity security within HP. One example ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NetIQ Identity Manager?
The pricing depends on whether we buy the solution as a service or a license. The license is expensive. If we buy it ...
What needs improvement with NetIQ Identity Manager?
The tool is used mostly in big systems to understand what is happening. There are not many technicians who know how t...
What is your primary use case for NetIQ Identity Manager?
NetIQ Directory is the main function of the product. As far as I know, it is the only event test directory that exist...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Zilla Security
Novell Identity Manager
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Information Not Available
Sheetz
Find out what your peers are saying about Idira IGA vs. OpenText Identity Manager and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
904,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.