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

OneLogin by One Identity vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 5, 2025

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

OneLogin by One Identity
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
10th
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
10th
Ranking in Access Management
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
17
Ranking in other categories
User Provisioning Software (7th), Identity Management (IM) (11th)
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
3rd
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
6th
Ranking in Access Management
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (5th), Data Governance (9th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of OneLogin by One Identity is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 8.4%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

Pete Snell - PeerSpot reviewer
Staff and students can now reset their passwords using their enrolled two-factor device as the authentication mechanism
We've been a OneLogin customer for several years now. While I like the platform, there have been some challenges. A great example is the amount of work needed with that webhook for the enrollment user experience. This functionality is native to some competing products. That's one area where we've leaned on our account rep over the years. They shouldn't rely on the customer to make this experience better. This is one feature request that hasn't been implemented yet. At the same time, they've implemented other features we've requested. One is the ability to use a personal email address as a factor. Initially, they didn't have that. We pushed hard on our account team for about two years before it was finally released. It's a give-and-take. Some of the product's features aren't perfect, but we've had some success pushing fixes to the development team that needs to happen. They've done a decent job. However, there are some fixes that they don't have an interest in. A lot of what I described was before OneLogin was acquired by Quest/One Identity. Things have changed. It doesn't feel like they're driving the product as OneLogin was. It may be because it's a new product to them, and they're still trying to get the lay of the land, process feature requests, etc., but it's not moving as fast as before. We've been experiencing some pain points since the acquisition. For example, there have been some outages we didn't see previously, which are a big topic with my executive team. You have hundreds of applications relying on this service for login. If the service is unavailable, nobody can log into these applications. The issues have high visibility. It's gotten better, but it's still there. It raises questions about whether One Identity can support the platform they've acquired. How are they enhancing the product? And how are they supporting the product and the service in the future? Those are two essential questions. There are also lots of nice-to-haves, but that's the case with any product.
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The single sign-on and the fact that we can integrate everything in one place and control from there were valuable features of this solution."
"One aspect I particularly appreciate is their exceptional customer support whenever I've needed assistance."
"Once I made the OneLogin ID, it would essentially make user names and passwords for every application that we had."
"The directory integration and SCIM provisioning are probably the best features compared to competitors."
"The most valuable feature is the ease with which we can manage the sign-on feature."
"Ease of integration with AD."
"It's super useful to have a single pane of glass when it comes to access management."
"The solution allows the user to search logs based on a specific time."
"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."
"It provides ease of connecting all our devices."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"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."
"It is a scalable solution."
 

Cons

"The solution keeps going down for many hours, which impacts the entire company. You can't access any applications. OneLogin Desktop has a huge problem where it locks your computers and you need to reset the whole computer, which is pretty insane."
"having a RESTful implementation instead of RPC would have been more desirable."
"The tool must be made more robust."
"To offboard, you have to manually click on this checklist, each of the checkmarks. It would actually be really nice if, for offboarding someone, you just click "offboard" and it automatically runs a script to do that."
"More off-hour support."
"They have downtime twice a year or once in six months. During the downtime, the SSO page did not come up. When users wanted to get to their email, they were redirected to the OneLogin page, but the page did not come up, and MFA and logins failed. It completely crippled us."
"This product doesn't necessarily provide us with all of the functionality that we need, such as being able to share passwords with external users."
"The uptime has not been great recently, with some outages lasting six, seven, or eight hours."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"It has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"In the beginning, the initial setup was very complex."
"We had issues with the stability."
"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."
"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."
"Ping Identity Platform must improve its UI since its management console is complicated."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Surprisingly expensive given the price of on-premise solutions."
"The pricing for OneLogin seems to be okay. The pricing and licensing are affordable. If you'd consider OneLogin to be expensive, it's worth it."
"We were happy with the price we got when we signed up, but I don't know what will happen when the time comes to renew because it is a different company now. We haven't seen any pricing models or had that discussion yet. My renewal is a year and a half away. It's worth what we're paying for it. There's no way we could provide the level of service for cheaper or try to do the same in-house."
"OneLogin's pricing, from the perspective of the education sector, seems quite reasonable for the value it delivers."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. It is much cheaper than other products."
"It was cheap in the beginning, and then it became very expensive. We were initially charged $2 per user per month, which was fine, but by the second year, they increased it to $5 per user. That became very expensive for us because we had about 1,500 users. At $2 per user, it comes out to be $3,000 a month, which is $36,000 a year. If we move to $5 per user, it comes out to be $7,500 a month. That made its cost so high. That is why we removed the product because the cost was high."
"While I wish OneLogin's pricing was more affordable, their licensing model, which is based on per user, is acceptable."
"The price of the licensing is fine."
"The product is costly."
"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 pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

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

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with OneLogin by One Identity?
There have been some outages over the years. The uptime has not been great recently, with some outages lasting six, seven, or eight hours. Improvement in the stability of the infrastructure would b...
What is your primary use case for OneLogin by One Identity?
We use OneLogin by One Identity to provide SAML authentication and single sign-on for all of our SaaS apps.
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

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

OneLogin has thousands of customers across multiple industries and from around the globe such as Uber, Airbnb, Noom, Petco, Sony, Lucky Brand, Tesco, Airbus, Japan Airlines, Aetna, Compass, Kaplan, Susan G. Komen, AAA and PennyMac.
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 OneLogin by One Identity vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,138 professionals have used our research since 2012.