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

Opal vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Opal
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
20th
Ranking in Access Management
19th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (11th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
5th
Ranking in Access Management
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (6th), Authentication Systems (6th), Data Governance (11th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) category, the mindshare of Opal is 1.0%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 3.6%, down from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ping Identity Platform3.6%
Opal1.0%
Other95.4%
Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
 

Featured Reviews

Pranay Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Software Developer at hireHQ
Focused workdays have replaced doomscrolling and now reduce my daily screen time significantly
Opal can be improved in some ways. In the paid version, there are multiple features, but in the freemium version, there are fewer features. The blockage of the application can be more rigorous. Right now, if we play two to three games, then a math game or anything, we are able to remove that lock. It should be more rigorous in some manner, and for some applications, it should be more rigorous. Application-wise rigorousness should be introduced. The different modes are good, but they should be more customizable according to the person. The end goal should meet whatever the objective is, so if the person has used more than six hours, then it should remind the person frequently that this application has used this time and this is an application you should not use. It should give us a timer or some kind of notification that the person will not use it anymore.
AmitRathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Analyst at Toll Holdings Limited
Single sign-on has simplified access while adaptive authentication protects complex user journeys
Regarding areas for improvement in Ping Identity Platform, there is not much. In terms of licensing and implementation costs, it has premium pricing, and it has a very complex implementation. It provides greater feasibility, but it takes a very long time in terms of complete building. There is a very limited number of legacy support, which can pose potential difficulties in integrating with certain older or legacy systems. Additionally, issue troubleshooting can be difficult at times. Sometimes issues can be difficult to diagnose and require extensive technical expertise. There is also a very steep learning curve for administrative purposes and potential difficulties with offline authentication scenarios.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Previously, my phone usage was around nine hours and fifteen minutes or more, but it has significantly reduced to around six hours and thirty minutes to seven hours, meaning two and a half to three hours has been reduced after using Opal as my primary screen time blocker."
"Opal has positively impacted my organization by reducing stress and increasing effectiveness for all our employees; it works better so all our employees have more time to sleep and they can investigate more."
"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."
"PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tools like ForgeRock and Okta, but I find PingFederate to be the most customizable."
"What I like best about PingID is that it's very user-friendly. PingID is well-built as a developer tool and regularly upgrades and updates via patches. I also like that PingID has clear documents that will help you integrate it with other solutions."
"Overall, I see PingFederate as a stable product and I do not see any bugs at the moment."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"I work on the application onboarding process because we have multiple customers and get data from different sources."
"PingID is very good, it's pretty stable as a product and we've never faced any issues, at least with the data applications integration, and the customers really like it."
"Personally, I appreciate Identity Orchestration the most about Ping Identity Platform, as with a simple drag-and-drop interface and the correct options we can build a complex and personalized process very efficiently and effectively for registration, login, and profile management."
 

Cons

"Opal can be improved in some ways."
"The product's community has certain shortcomings that require improvement."
"Ping Identity Platform is expensive."
"PingID's device management portal should be more easily accessible via a link. They provide no link to the portal like they do for the service. The passwordless functionality could be more comprehensive. You can't filter based on hardware devices. Having that filtering option would be great. Device authentication would be a great feature."
"The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it."
"The product is not customizable."
"We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
"PingID should put a little more effort into making a pretty self-explanatory deck about their tech features and the services they offer."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"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."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The product is costly."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The tool is quite affordable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions are best for your needs.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
20%
Retailer
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise22
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Opal?
Opal can be improved in some ways. In the paid version, there are multiple features, but in the freemium version, there are fewer features. The blockage of the application can be more rigorous. Rig...
What is your primary use case for Opal?
The main use case of Opal for me is to reduce my screen time during my work hours, during my wake-up time, and during my sleeping time to improve my focus and feasibility towards my work and my act...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingFederate?
Regarding pricing for Ping Identity Platform, I would rate it eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with PingAccess?
The areas where I think PingFederate needs room for improvement include that the most significant area I would recommend is that things such as redirects still do not have majority of the applicati...
What is your primary use case for PingAccess?
The main use case for PingFederate is that we are maintaining the centralized single sign-on with DuroSengel and Carabras as the two main instances to review. If any application is hosted outside o...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Find out what your peers are saying about Opal vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
902,894 professionals have used our research since 2012.