Ataccama ONE Platform vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

Ataccama and Ping Identity are both solutions in the Data Governance category. Ataccama is ranked #11 with an average rating of 8.0, while Ping Identity is ranked #8 with an average rating of 8.2. Ataccama holds a 2.4% mindshare in DG, compared to Ping Identity’s 0.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Ataccama users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ping Identity users who would recommend it.

Ataccama ONE Platform

Read 6 Ataccama ONE Platform reviews

1,296 Views
852 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ping Identity Platform

Read 28 Ping Identity Platform reviews

65 Views
66 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ataccama ONE Platform

Ping Identity Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024

Ping Identity Platform and Ataccama ONE Platform compete in identity management and data governance solutions. While Ping Identity Platform is favored for cost and customer support, Ataccama ONE is superior in its comprehensive feature set.

Features: Ping Identity Platform offers access management, secure data transmission, and robust security protocols. Ataccama ONE Platform provides advanced data governance, metadata management, and data quality tools.

Room for Improvement: Ping Identity Platform could enhance integration with non-standard systems, provide more granular role-based access controls, and improve biometric authentication support. Ataccama ONE Platform may benefit from simplifying initial setups, enhancing user console ease of use, and streamlining metadata integration with external tools.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Ping Identity Platform offers flexible deployment with extensive support, emphasizing straightforward integration. Ataccama ONE Platform requires significant setup efforts but offers dedicated customer service for effective implementation.

Pricing and ROI: Ping Identity Platform presents a competitive setup cost, offering favorable ROI by reducing identity management expenses. Ataccama ONE Platform involves higher initial investments, promising robust ROI through improved data management efficiencies.

To learn more, read our detailed Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform Report (Updated: March 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform

March 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 846,617 peers since 2012

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

Ataccama ONE Platform

Ranking in Data Governance

11th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Data Quality (5th), Master Data Management (MDM) Software (4th)

Ping Identity Platform

Ranking in Data Governance

8th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

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 April 2025, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Ataccama ONE Platform is 2.4%, up from 1.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Data Governance

Featured Reviews

JohnZacharkan

Senior Architect at SourcEdge

Enhanced data quality with machine learning support in diverse environments

We used Ataccama ONE to read data from the mainframe for a data quality perspective. There's a significant lack in that area with tools being able to interface with mainframe. MetLife has a diverse environment, including DB2, Oracle, SQL Server, legacy, and vSAN files. Being able to work in these various environments and put them to a single data quality tool was very appealing. Additionally, Ataccama supported AI and machine learning, which was one of the features I liked. Furthermore, we were able to interface bidirectionally with Collibra for data governance, catching data quality issues before propagating through the system.

Read full review

Dilip Reddy

Ping Engineer at Equitable

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The ease of use of the user console is valuable."

"The drag-and-drop feature is incredibly flexible and straightforward."

"The desktop version of the solution was particularly valuable to me, primarily for creating components. We opted for the data quality aspect to assess the quality of our data warehouse. The functionalities available allowed us to not only check data quality but also serve as an ETL tool. This versatility enabled data transformation and storage in various formats, including files on platforms like SharePoint or local online directories. The flexibility of the tool catered to the specific needs of those building components, contributing to our desired outcomes."

"The product’s important feature is data profiling and quality check."

"Customer service was excellent, and I would give it a ten out of ten."

"The notable aspect lies in the workflow structure, where building the workflow aligns significantly with data governance."

"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."

"It's pretty stable as a product."

"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."

"This is a user-friendly solution."

"I like the self-service feature. The 502 and UBP systems are also excellent. PingID's ability to authenticate with SSH, RDP, and Windows login is pretty handy. It covers the entire spectrum of use."

More Ping Identity Platform pros

Cons

"It is complicated to fetch 20-25 reports when we profile the data."

"There is a notable challenge in having to provide detailed filters before the site recognizes the search criteria."

"The interfacing to tools such as Collibra was somewhat cumbersome and required more thought."

"Speaking specifically about the version we use, version 12.3, I'm unsure if this has been addressed in subsequent versions. One improvement I'd like to see pertains to the language used in certain components, especially in data quality checks. The language complexity posed a challenge for beginners. Although we had on-site assistance from Ataccama, making it manageable for us, some individuals found it difficult to comprehend, necessitating additional support. The provision of a comprehensive guide for on-premise installation can also be enhanced. The lack of detailed information on the solution's workings and the overwhelming nature of notifications, with extensive content, were areas of concern. Streamlining the notification content in newer versions would significantly expedite issue resolution."

"Data movement is a pain."

"I believe it would be beneficial if it could enhance its flexibility to connect with a wider range of downstream systems beyond just Excel and Postgres."

"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."

"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."

"They could enhance the product's device tracking for better zero-trust security would be beneficial. Currently, it tracks IPs well but lacks detailed device information, which is crucial from a security standpoint."

"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."

"PingID should put a little more effort into making a pretty self-explanatory deck about their tech features and the services they offer."

"The product's community has certain shortcomings that require improvement."

"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."

"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."

More Ping Identity Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Our licensing model wasn't user-specific; instead, we paid fees for the engine and maintenance. As we didn't have a support contract, maintenance fees were likely nonexistent. Regarding the upgrade, we had an account for the initial two or three years, and considering the features provided by the solution, the pricing was reasonable."

"The product is reasonably priced."

"Despite not being extremely low-cost, the pricing appears reasonable, making it a profitable and viable choice for companies that prioritize data security and adhere to specific policies."

"The product is costly."

"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."

"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."

"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."

"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."

"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."

"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."

"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."

More Ping Identity Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

14%

Computer Software Company

13%

Insurance Company

Manufacturing Company

Financial Services Firm

25%

Computer Software Company

10%

Manufacturing Company

Insurance Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Ataccama ONE Platform?

The notable aspect lies in the workflow structure, where building the workflow aligns significantly with data governance.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Ataccama ONE Platform?

The interfacing to tools such as Collibra was somewhat cumbersome and required more thought. While it was possible to configure these interfaces, they required some coding. It would be beneficial i...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Ataccama ONE Platform?

Some of the use cases for Ataccama ONE included data quality, identifying and mapping to Collibra, which was their data governance tool. It was critical for them to interface directly with that too...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingID?

The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap.

See all answers

What needs improvement with PingID?

The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it.

See all answers

Comparisons

Informatica Intelligent Data Management Cloud (IDMC) vs Ataccama ONE Platform

Compared 20% of the time

Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs Ataccama ONE Platform

Compared 19% of the time

Collibra Governance vs Ataccama ONE Platform

Compared 19% of the time

Profisee vs Ataccama ONE Platform

Compared 8% of the time

Alation Data Catalog vs Ataccama ONE Platform

Compared 8% of the time

More Ataccama ONE Platform Competitors

Microsoft Entra ID vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 22% of the time

Symantec Siteminder vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 10% of the time

ForgeRock vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 7% of the time

Microsoft Active Directory vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

More Ping Identity Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Ataccama ONE Platform

April 2025

Download Ataccama ONE Platform product report

Buyer's Guide

Ping Identity Platform

March 2025

Download Ping Identity Platform product report

Also Known As

No data available

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ

Overview

Ataccama ONE Platform is a comprehensive data management and governance solution designed to address the challenges faced by organizations in managing and leveraging their data assets. Its primary use case is to enable organizations to gain control over their data, improve data quality, and ensure compliance with data regulations.

The most valuable functionality of Ataccama ONE includes data profiling, data quality management, data integration, master data management, and metadata management. These features allow organizations to understand the quality and structure of their data, integrate data from various sources, create a single view of their master data, and manage metadata to ensure data lineage and governance.

By leveraging Ataccama ONE, organizations can achieve several benefits. Firstly, it helps in improving data quality by identifying and resolving data issues, ensuring accurate and reliable data for decision-making. Secondly, it enables organizations to streamline data integration processes, reducing the time and effort required for data integration projects. Thirdly, it facilitates effective master data management, enabling organizations to have a consistent and accurate view of their critical data entities. Lastly, it helps organizations in complying with data regulations by providing data lineage, data privacy, and data governance capabilities.

Ataccama

IDENTITY DEFINED SECURITY PLATFORM delivers a unified, standards-based platform that can be deployed as SaaS, software or both and can scale to handle millions of identities. From multi-factor authentication and single sign-on to access security, directory and data governance, our capabilities work together to give employees, partners and customers secure access to cloud, mobile and enterprise applications, securing and streamlined everything from sign-on to sign-off and everywhere in between.

Ping Identity

Sample Customers

Société Générale, First Data, Raiffeisenbank International, T-Mobile, Avast, RSA, Toronto Public Library

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol

Buyer's Guide

Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform

March 2025

Free Report: Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Ataccama ONE Platform vs. Ping Identity Platform report.

See our list of best Data Governance vendors.

We monitor all Data Governance reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.