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

Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 3, 2024

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
7.8
Microsoft Purview Data Governance enhances data management, reduces risks, and boosts reputations, offering long-term advantages across industries.
Sentiment score
7.4
Ping Identity Platform simplifies identity management, lowers IT overhead, enhances security, improves efficiency, boosts satisfaction, and offers scalability.
Clients benefit from using a one-stop-shop solution, increasing their visibility across different platforms.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
5.8
Microsoft Purview support varies; quick and knowledgeable or delayed and less informed, rating six to ten overall.
Sentiment score
6.6
Ping Identity Platform's support is prompt, knowledgeable, and proactive, though some users find the support portal confusing.
They're skillful people who know what they're doing in their space.
Overall, it doesn't meet our expectations.
The support could be better, particularly with consulting.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
Microsoft Purview offers scalable data management, seamlessly integrates with Azure, handles numerous sources efficiently, but may incur high costs.
Sentiment score
7.5
Ping Identity Platform efficiently scales across servers and clusters, supports large environments, but performance varies based on configurations.
With automation, you can label five documents or 50,000 with the same amount of clicks.
The product is scalable and works across multi-cloud and multi-platform environments.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.4
Microsoft Purview Data Governance is stable with minimal issues, requires careful patch management, and supports a 99.9% SLA.
Sentiment score
7.9
Ping Identity Platform is highly reliable, with minimal bugs or crashes, though some infrastructure and server connection issues exist.
It can take seven days to 24 hours to determine whether a policy is effective.
 

Room For Improvement

Microsoft Purview needs improved integration, functionality, and support in data lineage, API, compliance, notifications, and third-party connections.
Ping Identity Platform requires stronger functionalities, enhanced user experience, better security, and comprehensive support to compete effectively with Microsoft.
Auto-tagging should be available at lower levels of licensing.
A watermark feature or similar tools to help enhance security for end users could be added.
It's essential to know if a feature isn't working due to missing licenses.
 

Setup Cost

Microsoft Purview Data Governance is cost-effective with flexible pricing but may require additional licenses for certain features.
Ping Identity Platform is competitively priced, offering robust features and good ROI, but may be costly for small businesses.
The feature might be available in the console, but it won't work without the proper license, creating confusion.
The experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing was smooth, as most Purview functionalities were included in the e5 licenses we migrated to for other reasons.
 

Valuable Features

Microsoft Purview Data Governance enhances data protection, classification, and compliance across multi-cloud environments with intuitive tools and automation features.
Ping Identity Platform offers robust security with multi-factor authentication, seamless integration, user-friendly interface, and extensive customization options.
The sensitivity labeling is the most valuable feature because it is the foundation for automating the encryption process and ensuring proper data handling across the organization.
It provides a comprehensive view of the entire ecosystem's threats and compliance in real time.
Purview's ability to connect to iOS, Mac, and Android devices is critical.
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Purview Data Gove...
Ranking in Data Governance
1st
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
Microsoft Security Suite (8th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Data Governance
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
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 Microsoft Purview Data Governance is 23.9%, down from 25.3% 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

James McDowall - PeerSpot reviewer
The sensitivity and retention options in Purview are excellent
Some of the menu headings may not be easy to understand for some people. For example, when I first used Purview, I noticed that one of the self-compliance centers had changed its name. Microsoft has done a huge amount of updates, and sometimes it's hard to keep track of what Purview can do. We almost constantly have to explore it. Maybe Microsoft could have a 365 roadmap where we can look at upcoming features, or some kind of bulletin announcement for Purview users that explains new features and what they can do in simple terms. We could also look at the menu settings. In my experience of using Purview, we've never used it as an exclusive system for IT professionals or technical staff. We were very keen that other specialists around the business made use of some of these features because we thought that some of what Purview could do was relevant to other departments as well as IT. For example, we have HR managers and financial staff who use it. I think that some of the terminology in Purview is pitched toward IT and tech professionals, and it may not be immediately understood by other specialists. This is something that could be improved.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Purview?
It is designed to seamlessly connect to various data sources, which is particularly beneficial for our customers who primarily use Microsoft technologies.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Purview?
The auto-tagging feature should be available at a lower licensing level.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Purview?
Auto-tagging should be available at lower levels of licensing. Right now, a high level of licensing is needed for auto-tagging, and this feature should be made available at a lower license level.
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

Microsoft Purview, MS Azure Purview
Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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 Microsoft Purview Data Governance vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
846,617 professionals have used our research since 2012.