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

OvalEdge 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

OvalEdge
Ranking in Data Governance
28th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Data Governance
17th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (6th), Authentication Systems (9th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (9th), Access Management (6th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of OvalEdge is 0.8%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 0.9%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ping Identity Platform0.9%
OvalEdge0.8%
Other98.3%
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

AzhagarasanAnnadorai - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at Kaizentric Technologies Private Limited
Enables comprehensive data governance with role-based access and directory integration
The UI is straightforward for technical users with organized features under different modules like data catalog and business glossary. The role-based access control and integration with the directory system allow strict governance and limited user access. The APIs are comprehensive, enabling integration with other systems even for creating virtual data catalogs.
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

"The UI is straightforward for technical users with organized features under different modules like data catalog and business glossary."
"Over time, OvalEdge has improved significantly."
"Ping Identity Platform can provide a solution for both workforce identity and access management and also for consumer identity and access management, which is CIAM."
"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."
"The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based capabilities for handling cloud applications and providing authentication and authorization through OIDC and SAML. It also supports integrations needed for both local and internal applications, including legacy applications requiring web server access."
"From a security perspective, I highly value the product's biometric authentication methods such as FIDO, FaceID, YubiKey, and the mobile app."
"The only feature we were looking for in PingID was SSO integration with our existing web app."
"PingFederate is a good product but there are limitations."
"Setting up the infrastructure with Ping Identity Platform is very easy compared to other IAM products."
"I would recommend PingFederate as an IAM solution for its no-code environment, single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, bidirectional services, and advanced features."
 

Cons

"The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration are areas needing improvement."
"They should promote more buyer's authentification, like a fingerprint or face recognition, something that's more convenient."
"We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."
"The product is not customizable."
"From the improvement perspective, they could bring IGA capability, which right now they only have in their SaaS offering."
"It has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"The product is costly."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
6%
 

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 is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OvalEdge?
The pricing is affordable compared to other tools, and we opted for 500 user license.
What needs improvement with OvalEdge?
The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration with legacy data systems are areas needing improvement. Advanced jobs require extra training and fine-tuning, making ...
What is your primary use case for OvalEdge?
GDPR compliance and enabling users to understand the transformation of data from one database to another. It is used mainly as a data catalog for data discovery, allowing users to understand the da...
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

Beaumont CHKD, UpWork, Pon, Rakuten, Verbund, Globe, Naranja
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 OvalEdge vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.