Imanami GroupID vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

Imanami and Ping Identity are both solutions in the Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) category. Imanami is ranked #25 with an average rating of 8.0, while Ping Identity is ranked #6 with an average rating of 8.2. Imanami holds a 0.4% mindshare in IAMS, compared to Ping Identity’s 5.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Imanami users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ping Identity users who would recommend it.

Imanami GroupID

Read 3 Imanami GroupID reviews

272 Views
120 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ping Identity Platform

Read 29 Ping Identity Platform reviews

2,477 Views
1,760 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Imanami GroupID

Ping Identity Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 2, 2024

Ping Identity Platform and Imanami GroupID are competing tools in the identity management space. Ping often takes the lead due to its comprehensive suite and robust features.

Features: Ping Identity Platform offers advanced access management, single sign-on capabilities, and multi-factor authentication, making it attractive for enterprises prioritizing security. Imanami GroupID provides automated group management and synchronization features tailored for dynamic group environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Imanami GroupID is favored for straightforward deployment and exceptional customer support, ensuring quick implementation. Ping Identity Platform, while offering superior functionality, involves a more complex setup requiring additional technical resources.

Pricing and ROI: Ping Identity Platform incurs higher initial setup costs due to its extensive feature set but delivers long-term ROI through enhanced security and integrations. Imanami GroupID offers a cost-effective initial investment, with users finding it worthwhile for its efficient capabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform Report (Updated: April 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform

April 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 850,028 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

Imanami GroupID

Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

25th

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

User Provisioning Software (11th), Active Directory Management (16th)

Ping Identity Platform

Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

6th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Authentication Systems (6th), Data Governance (8th), Access Management (4th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) category, the mindshare of Imanami GroupID is 0.4%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 5.3%, down from 7.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)

Featured Reviews

Jonathan Cauthorn

Identity and Access Management Manager at NeuGen

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.

Read full review

Dilip Reddy

Ping Engineer at Equitable

Easy to use but requires improvements in the area of stability

In my company, we have worked on authorization, and I know that there are different types of grants. We have worked on the authorization code, client credentials, and ROPC grant. There are two types of tokens, like the JWT token and internally managed reference tokens. JWT tokens are useful for finding information related to the claim requests. Internally managed reference tokens are useful for dealing with visual data and information. For the clients to fit the user information, they need to do additional work to fit all the user info into the site, which is to define and validate the token issue and provide the request for VPNs. I worked on the key differences between the authorization code and implicit grant. In the authorization code type, you will have the authorization code issued initially to the client, and the client has to exchange it with the authorization server, like using a DAC channel to get the access token. In implicit grants, tokens are issued right away if the application is a single-page application. We can either use the authorization code or an implicit grant.

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

"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. Based on that job code, we use the query tool and say 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. That runs every night, and the next day, everybody has the job codes they're supposed to have."

"I have found the overall features to be useful."

"The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logging in."

"The soundness of the solution is its most valuable feature. For example, if you are in our corporate network, you can log on without any traffic interfering."

"I would recommend PingFederate as an IAM solution for its no-code environment, single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, bidirectional services, and advanced features."

"I work on the application onboarding process because we have multiple customers and get data from different sources."

"The solution is stable. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches."

"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."

"It provides ease of connecting all our devices."

"It's pretty stable as a product."

More Ping Identity Platform pros

Cons

"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."

"The product's implementation is complex. It should also work on GPO."

"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."

"Notifications and monitoring are two areas with shortcomings in the solution that need improvement."

"There is room for improvement in the solution, particularly in security."

"PingID classifies the type of environment into internal and external, which is an area for improvement because you need to take additional steps to trust internal and external users."

"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."

"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."

"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."

"In the beginning, the initial setup was very complex."

More Ping Identity Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution is reasonable."

"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 platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."

"The product is costly."

"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."

"PingID pricing is a ten out of ten because it's a little bit cheaper than other tools, such as Okta and ForgeRock, and supports multiple tools."

"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."

"The tool is quite affordable."

"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."

"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."

More Ping Identity Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Computer Software Company

17%

Financial Services Firm

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

26%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Imanami GroupID?

Imanami GroupID's UI is good.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Imanami GroupID?

The product's implementation is complex. It should also work on GPO.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Imanami GroupID?

The notifications, approvals and emails are very smooth in Imanami GroupID. I rate it an eight out of ten.

See all answers

What do you like most about PingID?

The mobile biometric authentication option improved user experience. It's always about security because, with two-factor authentication, it's always a separate device verifying the actual user logg...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?

The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.

See all answers

What needs improvement with PingID?

The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.

See all answers

Comparisons

e-trust Horacius vs Imanami GroupID

Compared 55% of the time

Fischer Identity Governance vs Imanami GroupID

Compared 45% of the time

More Imanami GroupID Competitors

Microsoft Entra ID vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 21% of the time

Symantec Siteminder vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 10% of the time

ForgeRock vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Active Directory vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Saviynt vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

More Ping Identity Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

User Provisioning Software

April 2025

Download Imanami GroupID product report

Buyer's Guide

Ping Identity Platform

April 2025

Download Ping Identity Platform product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ

Overview

Groups don’t live forever. Project teams disband, departments re-organize, and employees change status. GroupID from Imanami leverages the pervasiveness of Microsoft® Active Directory and empowers IT professionals with the tools needed to effectively provision and manage users. Users can be quickly entered into the correct distribution and security groups, and are easily managed across multiple systems.

There Are Three Main Benefits To A Complete Group Management Solution:

Reduce the load on the IT staff and helpdesk
Improve employee productivity by putting users in the correct distribution groups immediately
Improve security by having each security group’s membership accurate immediately

Groups Are Never Out Of Date.

Users are empowered to solve common problems independently. Security and access aren’t compromised. IT is empowered with the right tools to help employees. Staff productivity goes up. What more could you want?

Imanami

IDENTITY DEFINED SECURITY PLATFORM delivers a unified, standards-based platform that can be deployed as SaaS, software or both and can scale to handle millions of identities. From multi-factor authentication and single sign-on to access security, directory and data governance, our capabilities work together to give employees, partners and customers secure access to cloud, mobile and enterprise applications, securing and streamlined everything from sign-on to sign-off and everywhere in between.

Ping Identity

Sample Customers

Grant Thornton LLP

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol

Buyer's Guide

Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform

April 2025

Free Report: Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Imanami GroupID vs. Ping Identity Platform report.

See our list of best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors.

We monitor all Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) 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.