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

Active Roles by One Identity vs Imanami GroupID comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 20, 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

Active Roles by One Identity
Ranking in User Provisioning Software
3rd
Ranking in Active Directory Management
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
92
Ranking in other categories
Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) (1st)
Imanami GroupID
Ranking in User Provisioning Software
18th
Ranking in Active Directory Management
16th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (36th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the User Provisioning Software category, the mindshare of Active Roles by One Identity is 4.9%, down from 6.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Imanami GroupID is 2.0%, up from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
User Provisioning Software Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Active Roles by One Identity4.9%
Imanami GroupID2.0%
Other93.1%
User Provisioning Software
 

Featured Reviews

Puru Solanki ( ITIL. CISM , CCSP ) - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Head at Citadel Global
Automation has streamlined onboarding and governance and delivers faster, more secure access
Overall, we are very satisfied with Active Roles by One Identity, but there are a few areas that could be improved. The user interface could be more modern and intuitive, especially for new administrators. Some advanced configuration and policy settings have a steep learning curve and could be simplified. We would also like to see more built-in integrations with cloud platforms and SaaS applications, along with additional out-of-the-box reporting templates. These improvements would make the product even easier and more flexible for organizations managing hybrid environments. One thing that would make our daily work even smoother is having more ready-to-use templates for common administrative tasks and reports. This would reduce the need for customization and help teams get up and running more quickly. Additionally, faster and simpler synchronization for hybrid and cloud environments would be beneficial, especially for organizations managing both on-premises and cloud identities. More detailed documentation and guided setup for advanced features would help new administrators learn the platform faster and more easily. One additional improvement I would like to see for Active Roles by One Identity is a better built-in dashboard with more real-time insights into identity and access activities. It would be helpful if upgrades and migrations were simpler and required less planning. Finally, expanding native integrations with more cloud services and third-party applications would make the platform even more versatile and reliable. These enhancements would improve the overall user experience while keeping the product's strong security and automation capabilities.
Jonathan Cauthorn - PeerSpot reviewer
Identity and Access Management Manager at a insurance company with 201-500 employees
Simplifies the task of managing groups and is affordable and easy to implement
I'd like to see it be able to do more than just groups. I'd like it to be able to do some things with email distribution lists as well. It can do that, but there were a few things that were limiting. It was difficult to get it set up, particularly with Azure in the cloud. I'd like that to be a little bit smoother. I'd like to see a better user interface. It works, but it is clunky. There should be better import and export of LDAP queries and better management tools. We've got a ton of groups, and it does take quite a while to do nightly processing. This is something that definitely needs improvement.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is an easier way for me to manage Active Directory with more advanced features."
"Having a tool to manage all changes to AD from a single pane of glass is awesome."
"The provisioning and deprovisioning saves a lot of time and skips a lot of errors."
"One Identity Active Roles has had a transformative impact on my organization, moving from controlled chaos to governed operations."
"One Identity Active Roles has impacted my organization positively by reducing manual work, improving security, saving administrative time, and reducing human errors."
"One Identity Active Roles has had a very positive impact on the organization, especially in terms of efficiency, security, and compliance."
"In comparison to native Active Directory tools, using Active Roles for delegation is so much better. It uses an access template and that makes it easy to see who can access what. In fact, you can do that for many objects as well."
"One Identity Active Roles has significantly reduced the complexity and workload of administrative tasks related to Active Directory, as routine tasks like user creation, password resets, and access changes are automated or delegated, saving time and reducing manual efforts while making management more structured and consistent, making overall administration easier and more efficient."
"I have found the overall features to be useful."
"Imanami GroupID's UI is good."
"For each job code, we go through and determine the access they're supposed to have to the system, and based on that job code, we use the query tool so that anybody who is in this job code gets these groups added to them, or conversely, if they change job codes, it removes the ones that they shouldn't have and adds the one they should, which runs every night so that the next day everybody has the job codes they're supposed to have."
 

Cons

"The main area of improvement would be the user interface and ease of configuration, particularly configuration with AD should be much improved."
"One area for improvement would be the initial setup, which feels a little bit complex and could be simplified."
"Even though I advocate for One Identity Active Roles, there are areas for improvement, particularly in hybrid integration experiences where it feels a bit clunky compared to its capabilities for on-premises AD management."
"For the AAD management feature, it needs to improve the objects that we can manage and the security."
"The main improvement I would suggest for One Identity Active Roles is making the UI and policy configuration more intuitive."
"The user interface could be more modern and intuitive, especially for new administrators."
"I have not seen a return on investment or any relevant metrics and I cannot imagine we would have saved any employees or any full-time equivalents for One Identity Active Roles."
"The user interface needs to be more modern and scalable. There are certain screen resolutions where the product is unusable."
"The product's implementation is complex. It should also work on GPO."
"I'd like to see a better user interface. It works, but it is clunky. There should be better import and export of LDAP queries and better management tools."
"The mobile application needs to be improved and there should be chatbox features to allow users to easily reach out for assistance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's expensive."
"It's fairly priced."
"The licensing model is a simple user-based model, not that much complicated."
"The pricing for Active Roles is expensive but not as expensive as other solutions like Okta."
"The pricing is on the higher end."
"The price is reasonable. It costs us about 1 million Danish kroner annually, and we also spend about half as much on consultants."
"The pricing is high. I have not been involved with the renewal or cost aspect, but I know it is not cheap by any means. However, it is very useful for our environment."
"It is on a yearly basis, and it has the product license fee and the support for it. So, there is the licensing fee, and there is the annual maintenance that includes the support. I don't remember exactly, but we're probably paying somewhere in the neighborhood of $20,000 to $30,000 for it per year. We've got a pretty large implementation of it, and for the amount that we do, it is a pretty good deal. I would rate it a four out of five in terms of pricing."
"The price of the solution is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which User Provisioning Software solutions are best for your needs.
919,586 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
26%
Healthcare Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
24%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Media Company
10%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business98
Midsize Enterprise19
Large Enterprise46
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with One Identity Active Roles?
To improve Active Roles by One Identity, I would like to see more automation around role assignment and access reviews, along with better reporting and an easier-to-use dashboard. While the integra...
What is your primary use case for One Identity Active Roles?
My main use case for Active Roles by One Identity involves managing user access and roles across different applications while ensuring users have the right permissions based on their responsibiliti...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Quest Active Roles
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City of Frankfurt, Moore Public Schools, George Washington University, Transavia Airlines, Howard County, MD. See all stories at OneIdentity.com/casestudies
Grant Thornton LLP
Find out what your peers are saying about Active Roles by One Identity vs. Imanami GroupID and other solutions. Updated: October 2026.
919,586 professionals have used our research since 2012.