Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

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
20th
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
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Authentication Systems (6th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Access Management (4th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of OvalEdge is 0.5%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

AzhagarasanAnnadorai - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Dilip Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
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.

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."
"It's convenient for users to log in through Ping using the Kerberos adapter because it doesn't require them to authenticate again."
"I would recommend PingFederate as an IAM solution for its no-code environment, single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, bidirectional services, and advanced features."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
"People use the solution to secure their applications and authenticate particular processes."
"PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies."
"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."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
"I work on the application onboarding process because we have multiple customers and get data from different sources."
 

Cons

"The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration are areas needing improvement."
"The lack of connectivity to mainframe systems and the complexity of integration are areas needing improvement."
"We had issues with the stability."
"It has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"One significant challenge was ensuring smooth user migration during system upgrades in Ping."
"PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep."
"The timing of the token validity, if it could be extended, would be great. I'm not sure if there is even an option to configure these types of settings."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Healthcare Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Transportation Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
26%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?
The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.
What needs improvement with PingID?
The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.
 

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: April 2025.
850,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.