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

One Identity Active Roles vs One Identity Safeguard 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
7.0
Automation enhanced productivity, cut resource usage by 20%, improved satisfaction, and provided quick ROI with notable cost savings.
Sentiment score
7.1
One Identity Safeguard enhances security, compliance, and efficiency, especially benefiting organizations with local infrastructure, by managing privileged access.
Any PAM solution, when I deploy it well and customers use it, leads to a return on investment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
9.0
One Identity Active Roles support is praised for responsiveness and expertise, despite occasional delays in complex cases.
Sentiment score
6.6
One Identity Safeguard's customer service is generally strong but experiences inconsistent response times and issue resolution.
One Identity's support is great.
I sometimes need escalations to reach expertise.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.5
One Identity Active Roles excels in scalability, effectively supporting automation and management in complex, large-scale environments despite Azure challenges.
Sentiment score
7.0
One Identity Safeguard is scalable and fits diverse needs, but some experience degradation and suggest improvements in scalability.
It is very beneficial for large and complex environments.
If customer usage increases, I can add new appliances, but this incurs costs.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.6
One Identity Active Roles is highly stable with minimal issues, though some experience web interface lags potentially infrastructure-related.
Sentiment score
7.5
One Identity Safeguard is stable with strong functionality and high availability, despite occasional configuration challenges and non-LTS bugs.
I encounter problems primarily with the failover procedure.
 

Room For Improvement

One Identity Active Roles needs better customization, multi-language scripting, and improved Azure integration, documentation, and user interface.
Users seek improved session management, integration, interface, resource efficiency, technical support, documentation, upgrades, policy management, storage, and cost solutions.
A way to connect to various directories and integrate with cloud directories would be beneficial.
Enhancements to the console are also necessary because it is more confusing than the web interface.
For some configurations on the SPS side, if I need to make changes, such as for DNS servers, I must redeploy the machine.
 

Setup Cost

Enterprise buyers view One Identity Active Roles pricing as high but competitive, with flexible licensing and fair value for functionality.
One Identity Safeguard is a robust, costly enterprise solution favored for its effectiveness despite cheaper alternatives.
The pricing is high.
 

Valuable Features

One Identity Active Roles offers robust access control, AD management, and cloud integration, enhancing security and compliance through customizable features.
One Identity Safeguard offers secure privileged access control, auditing, and seamless integration with features like password vaulting and advanced authentication.
It is very intuitive and close to the native tools.
It is an easier way for me to manage Active Directory with more advanced features.
I think One Identity should improve its documentation because it is vast and not clear, and clear documentation on implementing the solution would be advantageous for consultants.
 

Categories and Ranking

One Identity Active Roles
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (5th), Active Directory Management (5th)
One Identity Safeguard
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
41
Ranking in other categories
User Entity Behavior Analytics (UEBA) (6th), Privileged Access Management (PAM) (3rd)
 

Featured Reviews

Neera Jain - PeerSpot reviewer
Requires minimal training and provides granular control
The granular control has been very helpful for us. We want to be able to control what level users have access to. It is possible to control access levels at the organizational unit or even the attribute level, making it helpful for us. Active Roles helped increase operational efficiency in our organization. We have delegated user provisioning to the help desk so they can create users or manage accounts. We have delegated group management to identified group owners who can manage their groups. Some of them just need read-only access to AD; they do not need to download the native tools. They can just do it via a browser. Active Roles has helped our organization reduce the number of erroneous privileged accounts. We have set the templates, and we have set the standards. It helps standardize all the naming conventions and how they are provisioned with the rules. That is definitely very helpful. We use the change history to see who might have modified what object. We have that tracking, but we use a tool from Quest called Change Auditor that can do the auditing to figure out who did what type of thing for auditing.
Tor Nordhagen - PeerSpot reviewer
Transparent mode for privileged sessions will greatly simplify our client's administrative situation
We're introducing the solution's transparent mode for privileged sessions. This is part of what the client hasn't used before. It will simplify their administrative situation greatly. So far, the rollout of this feature has been a seamless process, but we're still in the midst of rolling it out. The benefits will be on the risk side. Right now, the way accounts are managed, you don't necessarily know who is using an account. There's a shared admin account, and that's not a good thing. And those accounts are shared in wallets by several people. One of the real benefits of safeguarding here is that the client will have an absolute audit of who is using an administrative interface, whether it's server or network.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Non-Human Identity Management (NHIM) solutions are best for your needs.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
Computer Software Company
24%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Government
6%
Manufacturing Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Active Roles?
The pricing is high. I have not been involved with the renewal or cost aspect, but I know it is not cheap by any means. However, it is very useful for our environment.
What needs improvement with One Identity Active Roles?
I know they have increased support for Entra ID and mentioned providing support for AWS. A way to connect to various directories and integrate with cloud directories would be beneficial.
What do you like most about One Identity Safeguard?
The identity discovery is good, and the performance is pretty good value.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for One Identity Safeguard?
One Identity Safeguard is expensive. The license is around $3,000 per month.
What needs improvement with One Identity Safeguard?
I find it complicated to implement HTTPS monitoring because the documentation is unclear. The disaster recovery process is complicated for me. For some configurations on the SPS side, if I need to ...
 

Also Known As

Quest Active Roles
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City of Frankfurt, Moore Public Schools, George Washington University, Transavia Airlines, Howard County, MD. See all stories at OneIdentity.com/casestudies
Cavium
Find out what your peers are saying about One Identity Active Roles vs. One Identity Safeguard and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
842,466 professionals have used our research since 2012.