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

Ping Identity Platform vs Venafi 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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.4
Ping Identity Platform simplifies identity management, lowers IT overhead, enhances security, improves efficiency, boosts satisfaction, and offers scalability.
Sentiment score
3.3
Venafi reduces outages, automates certificate distribution, saves costs, and improves efficiency with faster installations and reduced manual workload.
With Venafi, it wasn't about saving time but achieving functionality that was otherwise impossible, such as distributing certificates without manual intervention.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
Ping Identity Platform's customer service is timely and knowledgeable, though occasionally slow for complex issues; self-help resources are commended.
Sentiment score
5.6
Venafi's customer service is efficient and competent, though some delays occur post-CyberArk acquisition, lacking global 24/7 support.
I have reached out to technical support for troubleshooting SAML certificate mismatches and federated errors between Ping and enterprise apps.
Inquiries are typically addressed the same day, with most issues, even complex ones, resolved within 24 hours.
Venafi's technical support is excellent, with even their first-tier support being in-house and highly competent.
Their technical support is knowledgeable and helpful, making Venafi stand out among other CyberArk products.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
Ping Identity Platform offers adaptable scalability and performance, varying by configuration, environment, and server setup for different user needs.
Sentiment score
4.9
Venafi is scalable across environments, with strong cloud performance, valued for access control and integration, despite setup challenges.
This role-based access control enhances scalability and efficiency by providing a focused view of necessary information.
Horizontal scaling is a necessity rather than vertical scaling.
Scalability with Venafi is good; you can definitely use it if you have ten thousand certs, a thousand certs, a million, or a couple million.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.9
Ping Identity Platform is stable and reliable, with minor integration challenges and manageable issues, rated 8-10 for stability.
Sentiment score
5.4
Venafi is generally stable and reliable, with occasional minor bugs and rare outages impacting user satisfaction slightly.
Venafi's stability has been consistently reliable.
Venafi is a stable product. It's definitely more stable than others.
For stability, I'd rate it around six out of ten since we experience some outages despite the investment.
 

Room For Improvement

Ping Identity Platform needs enhanced authentication, integration, and user interface improvements for better security and user adoption.
Venafi requires UI enhancement, improved documentation, better cloud integration, advanced features, and more development for cloud capabilities.
I would like to enable ServiceNow Generative AI for auto-diagnosing PingFederate SSO failures and suggest remediation steps.
Expanding the range of out-of-the-box integrations would significantly improve the user experience.
The yearly DNS verification required by certificate authorities necessitates manual intervention, hindering full automation.
They are pushing for cloud adoption, but we prefer on-premises solutions due to regulatory concerns.
 

Setup Cost

Ping Identity Platform offers flexible annual pricing, appealing for large enterprises, valued for security and efficiency over competitors.
Venafi pricing is competitive but complex, with costs for public CA services, requiring a three-year commitment.
Venafi offers good value for the cost.
The pricing has increased for us, impacting our organization due to its operational expenditure (OPEX).
For our budget, Venafi's cost is moderate. It's not expensive as internal certificate generation is free, and we only pay for the public CA certificate signer and for storage in Venafi.
 

Valuable Features

Ping Identity Platform offers robust security with multi-factor authentication, seamless integrations, and customizable single sign-on for enhanced connectivity.
Venafi enhances operational efficiency with certificate discovery, automation, and integration, offering ease of use, compliance, and seamless management.
The platform enhances security measures by analyzing multi-factor authentication attempts, highlighting suspicious patterns, and generating compliance reports.
The most valuable feature of Venafi is the automation that helps save time and reduce human error.
It ensures centralized certificate management, which is crucial for compliance and maintaining best practices.
What I like best about Venafi is that it's very easy to get somebody on a call and get any of my questions answered.
 

Categories and Ranking

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Authentication Systems
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
29
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (3rd), Data Governance (8th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (5th), Access Management (3rd), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Venafi
Ranking in Authentication Systems
10th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.6
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 4.0%, down from 4.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Venafi is 1.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems
 

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.
Adam Goldstein - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates certificate management across platforms and has enhanced integration support
Venafi's automation capabilities were significant, as they allowed us to automate certificate rotation and deployment effectively. We integrated it with GlobalSign and aimed to automate DNS verification, although challenges remained. Venafi's platform-agnostic nature was beneficial for handling certificates across different systems like IIS, AWS, and Azure. It ensures centralized certificate management, which is crucial for compliance and maintaining best practices. It significantly improved our operational efficiency by automating certificate workflows. This reduced the number of certificates requiring manual management, freeing internal resources from deploying trivial certificates. While some complex certificates still needed manual intervention, automating simpler ones eliminated internal bottlenecks associated with tasks like uploading certificates to Imperva. By automating these processes, we reduced errors, streamlined workflows, and eliminated the need to repeatedly remember and execute complex procedures, ultimately increasing our overall operational efficiency. The automation capabilities are good; when properly configured, it performs as expected.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Retailer
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
8%
Government
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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.
What do you like most about Venafi?
We use Venafi for PKI certificates.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Venafi?
For our budget, Venafi's cost is moderate. It's not expensive as internal certificate generation is free, and we only pay for the public CA certificate signer and for storage in Venafi. With the to...
What needs improvement with Venafi?
As an end user, I cannot specifically point out improvements, but I believe it would be beneficial to display active certificates in a separate column on the UI, so users can easily find what they ...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Surescripts, CME Group, TD Bank Group, Aetna, MoneyGram, Zions Bancorp, Cisco
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Venafi and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,484 professionals have used our research since 2012.