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

Ping Identity Platform vs Safe-T Secure Application Access 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

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Access Management
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (3rd), Authentication Systems (7th), Data Governance (8th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (5th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Safe-T Secure Application A...
Ranking in Access Management
28th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Infrastructure VPN (45th), ZTNA (21st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Access Management category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 7.3%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Safe-T Secure Application Access is 0.6%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Access Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Ping Identity Platform7.3%
Safe-T Secure Application Access0.6%
Other92.1%
Access Management
 

Featured Reviews

MAHESHKUMAR7 - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers multi-factor authentication and application support side of PingFederate but application only supports specific protocols
A lot of teams work with technical support, but I work with it for user issues only. You might need support with things like application swaps, application names, and application URLs. I didn't know where to find those in Ping Identity, so I contacted technical support for those issues. The support team is very clever and active. They provide end-to-end support once an issue is created. I have worked with most of the support team. I also work with the support team because I work with the operations team. I provide 24/7 support to production and non-production environments. I coordinate with application and network teams to troubleshoot critical tickets and issues related to Ping Identity solutions.
it_user787671 - PeerSpot reviewer
Needs to be easier to configure and to display logs more simply
We use only it for scanning files for viruses. That's the only feature we use in this product It needs to be easier to configure, it should be something that's working well with other sources. It should be something that allows me to see the logs simply. One to three years. Sometimes it doesn't…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"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."
"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."
"People use the solution to secure their applications and authenticate particular processes."
"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."
"From a security perspective, I highly value the product's biometric authentication methods such as FIDO, FaceID, YubiKey, and the mobile app."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"It's convenient for users to log in through Ping using the Kerberos adapter because it doesn't require them to authenticate again."
"It is a scalable solution...It is a stable solution."
"It's easy to use over the web. A user who is not in the office can use it and securely insert files."
"If you want a very flexible system that you can easily integrate, and develop interfaces for it or plug-ins to other application environments, it's probably the most flexible"
"the security level is very high. After we tested it and checked all the security aspects of the product, we found that it's highly secure."
"Safe-T is very good for users because it has plug-in for Outlook."
 

Cons

"They could use some bio-certification. It's just more user-friendly and more convenient than entering the one time passes. That would be an improvement."
"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"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."
"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."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult."
"Some colleagues have mentioned API connectivity, data security, and privacy issues."
"One important thing that we haven't found in this product is the ability to provide a read-only view for documents. Also, the ability for the customer to add annotations to these documents."
"The Outlook agent is not working well for installing it in the entire office."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"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."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
9%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise20
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

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.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
Safe-T SDA, Safe-T, Safe-T Software-Defined Access
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Government of Israel, eviCore Healthcore, Glen Imaging, Sarin, LBG, Rollomatic, Boegli-Gravures SA, Banque Heritage, Groupe Minoteries, Temenos, ZEK, RLM Finsbury, Harel Insurance, Meitav Dash
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Safe-T Secure Application Access and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,566 professionals have used our research since 2012.