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

IBM Security Verify Access vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

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

IBM Security Verify Access
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
15th
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
17th
Ranking in Access Management
14th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Identity Management (IM) (17th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
5th
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
6th
Ranking in Access Management
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
30
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (7th), Data Governance (10th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of IBM Security Verify Access is 2.4%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 5.2%, down from 8.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ping Identity Platform5.2%
IBM Security Verify Access2.4%
Other92.4%
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

Ateeq Rehman - PeerSpot reviewer
Unit Head System Implementor at Allied Bank Limited
Has improved secure user access while managing development through multiple technologies
I have already explained this in my previous call; I don't handle financial terms and commercials. Pricing is generally managed by functional teams and management looking after licensing matters. In Pakistan, vendors such as Oracle and IBM manage account relationships with clients and have tailored pricing models, so I do not have sufficient insights into that aspect.IBM Security Verify Access installation process is not straightforward; it requires underlying specialized knowledge upon which the IBM products are based. The complexity and scalability of the architecture necessitate in-depth technical knowledge and understanding of the system. Thus, installation is not as simple as clicking through; it requires extensive configuration of the underlying application servers, such as IBM WebSphere, where these products are deployed and configured.
SV
Senior ServiceNow Developer at Wells Fargo
Generative AI automates access reviews and provides workflow efficiencies
I work with Governance, Risk, and Compliance (GRC), IT Service Management (ITSM), and Customer Service Management (CSM) modules of ServiceNow. My project is related to cybersecurity. I have touched on generative AI and integrations like SOAP APIs. I have used the Ping Identity Platform for seamless…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"IBM Security Verify Access is providing a secure way of handling the user login journey, and secure user authentication is fully managed by ISAM or ISVA."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth; for legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users, and from the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"The solution has powerful authentification and authorization and offers a good way to increase security."
"It's a good solution for identification and access management."
"The tool provides a password vault, single sign-on, and multifactor authentication. It offers various authentication methods like fingerprint integration, one-time passwords, or tokens sent via email or SMS. This ensures secure access to your accounts by providing multiple authentication options."
"The most valuable feature of IBM Security Access Manager, at least for my company, is multi-factor authentication. That's the only feature my company is using. The solution works well and has no glitches. IBM Security Access Manager is a very good solution, so my company is still using it."
"IBM Security Verify Access, formerly known as ISAM, IBM Security Access Manager, now renamed to ISVA, integrates with central directory services for our organization and provides user management functionality."
"From the integration point of view, it supports SAML, OIDC, and OAuth. For legacy applications that don't have support for SAML and other new protocols, it provides single sign-on access to end-users. From the integration compatibility point of view, it is highly capable."
"The main reason why we use this product is to make sure that we can use our corporate account to log on to applications in the cloud, and from that perspective, it helps us in our account life-cycle management because if somebody is leaving the company, that account will be automatically deleted, which saves time."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"The only feature we were looking for in PingID was SSO integration with our existing web app."
"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."
"It provides ease of connecting all our devices."
"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."
"People use the solution to secure their applications and authenticate particular processes."
 

Cons

"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area. OIDC is a third-party integration that we do with the cloud platforms, and OAuth is an authorization mechanism for allowing a user having an account with Google or any other provider to access an application. Organizations these days are looking for just-in-time provisioning use cases, but IBM Security Access Manager is not very mature for such use cases. There are only a few applications that can be integrated, and this is where this product is lagging. However, in terms of configuration and single sign-on mechanisms, it is a great product."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications."
"What we'd like improved in IBM Security Access Manager is its onboarding process as it's complex, particularly when onboarding new applications. We need to be very, very careful during the onboarding. We have no issues with IBM Security Access Manager because the solution works fine, apart from the onboarding process and IBM's involvement in onboarding issues. If we need support related to the onboarding, we've noticed a pattern where support isn't available, or they don't have much experience, or we're not getting a response from them. We're facing the same issue with IBM Guardium. As we're just focusing on the multi-factor authentication feature of IBM Security Access Manager and we didn't explore any other features, we don't have additional features to suggest for the next release of the solution, but we're in discussion about exploring ID management and access management features, but those are just possibilities because right now, we're focused on exploring our domain."
"The solution could be classified as a hilt system. There are a lot of resources being used and it is suitable for very large enterprises or the public sector."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"The user interface needs to be simplified, it's complex and not user-friendly."
"There are a lot of areas that can be improved, but the main area is the lack of customization. You cannot easily customize anything in the product. It is not easy to tweak the functionality. It is challenging to change the out-of-the-box functionality."
"They can improve the single sign-on configuration for OIDC and OAuth. That is not very mature in this product, and they can improve it in this particular area."
"If the solution is going to compete with Microsoft, they need to offer more unique functionality to keep their current user base."
"The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it."
"The product is not customizable."
"In the beginning, the initial setup was very complex."
"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."
"For external customers, they do have challenges, although there are solutions for that available, as well."
"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."
"We had issues with the stability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It costs about 300K AED for a year. Its pricing is a bit on the higher end, but in comparison to other products in the market, its price is still better. There are lots of other products that are very costly."
"The product is not expensive. It depends on the number of users."
"The license and costs depend on the amount range of users you have. For just approximately 2,000 users, the price is practical and fair. However, when you have 20,000 users, it starts to become really expensive, and the discount per user is not attractive enough to go ahead and purchase."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"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."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"The product is costly."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Government
9%
Insurance Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
22%
Retailer
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business9
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with IBM Security Access Manager?
I have already explained this in my previous call; I don't handle financial terms and commercials. Pricing is generally managed by functional teams and management looking after licensing matters. I...
What is your primary use case for IBM Security Access Manager?
We are still using the IBM BPM platform to automate the processes for our organization.I generally use Microsoft Project for project planning and schedule management, especially in relation to Orac...
What advice do you have for others considering IBM Security Access Manager?
My current domain is leading project development, overseeing both technical and functional areas in process automation and orchestration, along with the hands-on implementation of process automatio...
What do you like most about PingFederate?
PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tool...
What needs improvement with PingFederate?
It requires some expertise to set up and manage. Also, having dedicated support is helpful. It's not something anyone can just set up and run without assistance – ideally, a team using PingFederate...
What is your primary use case for PingFederate?
We use PingFederate to provide SSO (Single Sign-On) solutions to enterprise applications. We support protocols like SAML (Security Assertion Markup Language), OAuth, and OpenID Connect. For example...
 

Also Known As

IBM Security Verify Access (SVA), IBM Security Access Manager, ISAM
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

POST Luxembourg
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 IBM Security Verify Access vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
889,855 professionals have used our research since 2012.