Oracle Access Manager vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

Oracle and Ping Identity are both solutions in the Access Management category. Oracle is ranked #8 with an average rating of 9.3, while Ping Identity is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.3. Oracle holds a 2.0% mindshare in AM, compared to Ping Identity’s 6.3% mindshare. Additionally, 76% of Oracle users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Ping Identity users who would recommend it.

Oracle Access Manager

Read 21 Oracle Access Manager reviews

1,227 Views
1,141 Comparison Views

76% willing to recommend

Ping Identity Platform

Read 30 Ping Identity Platform reviews

6,089 Views
2,557 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Oracle Access Manager

Ping Identity Platform

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Oracle Access Manager and Ping Identity Platform based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.

To learn more, read our detailed Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,744 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

Oracle Access Manager

Ranking in Access Management

8th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

5.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Ping Identity Platform

Ranking in Access Management

3rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Authentication Systems (7th), Data Governance (10th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Access Management category, the mindshare of Oracle Access Manager is 2.0%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 6.3%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Access Management Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Ping Identity Platform	6.3%
Oracle Access Manager	2.0%
Other	91.7%

Access Management

Featured Reviews

SurajShah

Consultant at a tech services company with 11-50 employees

Offers strong support and consistent updates improve security features

It is a heavyweight application. The product deployment and installation takes time, and the environment details are complex. ForgeRock is very quick to deploy on Tomcat, but Oracle Access Manager must be deployed on WebLogic, a heavyweight server. You cannot deploy Oracle Access Manager on Tomcat. If an organization has sufficient budget to spend on servers, then it is useful. For organizations that do not want to spend too much money on Oracle Access Manager, maintenance and upgrades take time, whereas with ForgeRock, that is the opposite as fewer resources are required. Being a heavyweight application, it will take more time for deployment and installation compared to ForgeRock or Okta. Okta is cloud-based, so it does not take much time. ForgeRock on-premise only needs deployment on a Tomcat server, making it less complex as it is a lightweight application.

Read full review

Shruthi R Varikoti

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…

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

"Excellent SSO solution for Oracle products."

"Access Manager allows us to efficiently manage a broad spectrum of applications while ensuring secure, single-page application access."

"I would tell others that this solution is reliable. If they are looking for a solution that is reliable and that is scalable, then this is a good one."

"The product supports customization."

"The MFA is the most valuable aspect."

"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten...I rate the technical support a ten out of ten."

"The product was built to be scalable."

"I find the authentication module, authentication scheme, and security policy most useful in Oracle Access Manager."

More Oracle Access Manager pros

"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."

"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."

"It is a scalable solution."

"From a security perspective, I highly value the product's biometric authentication methods such as FIDO, FaceID, YubiKey, and the mobile app."

"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."

"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's convenient for users to log in through Ping using the Kerberos adapter because it doesn't require them to authenticate again."

"PingFederate gives you granular control over the settings. There are many options for fine-tuning policies."

More Ping Identity Platform pros

Cons

"There are problems with stability."

"The solution's lifecycle management is troublesome. Also, another area of issue in the solution is the part involving documentation of certain features."

"In the next release, they should focus more on use cases related to customer access management, customer identity, and access management."

"Installation and deployment take time, but implementation is straightforward and easy, and they have very good support."

"Multi-factor authentication requires a lot of processes and technicalities."

"Sometimes if a session takes too long, you have to log in again."

"Although Oracle Access Manager is generally stable, we experienced issues with multi-domain configurations and web agent settings."

"In other products, we can customize on the GUI end, whereas in Oracle, we need to take a backup of the JAR file and then customize it...and during this process, sometimes the WebLogic admin console will go down, which will impact the process."

More Oracle Access Manager cons

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

"They could use some bio-certification. It's just more user-friendly and more convenient than entering the one time passes. That would be an improvement."

"The solution should allow for better integration with other platforms and the UBT."

"PingID's device management portal should be more easily accessible via a link. They provide no link to the portal like they do for the service. The passwordless functionality could be more comprehensive. You can't filter based on hardware devices. Having that filtering option would be great. Device authentication would be a great feature."

"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."

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

"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."

"PingFederate's UI could be streamlined. They have recently made several improvements, but it's still too complex. It's a common complaint. The configuration should be simplified because the learning curve is too steep."

More Ping Identity Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is a little expensive."

"Can be expensive as a solution."

"The tool is affordable."

"The price is really good and it is flexible because they have CPU licenses. The license is a one-time-only purchase."

"On a scale where one is a high price, and ten is a low price, I rate the solution a one. Purchasing a license for the solution is very expensive now."

"I cannot comment on the exact pricing because Oracle has different licensing models for other clients, making it flexible."

"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 offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."

"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."

"The product is costly."

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

"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."

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

"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."

More Ping Identity Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Access Management solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

18%

Government

11%

Manufacturing Company

Marketing Services Firm

Financial Services Firm

22%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Retailer

Computer Software Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	16
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	20

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Oracle Access Manager?

I am currently not exposed to the pricing issue, but I think Oracle Access Manager is more expensive than other products. I have not dealt with the setup cost concern as we have a team responsible ...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Oracle Access Manager?

For scalability, Oracle Access Manager demonstrates a high level due to high availability and scalability with redundant nodes to load balance across multiple nodes for Oracle Access Manager and Or...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Oracle Access Manager?

My main use cases for Oracle Access Manager involve using it as an authentication server integrated with Oracle Internet Directory as LDAP, which contains the user store for authentication. We have...

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

Microsoft Entra ID vs Oracle Access Manager

Compared 21% of the time

OpenText Access Manager with Managed Services vs Oracle Access Manager

Compared 19% of the time

Okta Platform vs Oracle Access Manager

Compared 13% of the time

ForgeRock vs Oracle Access Manager

Compared 11% of the time

i-Sprint AccessMatrix Universal Access Management vs Oracle Access Manager

Compared 5% of the time

More Oracle Access Manager Competitors

Microsoft Entra ID vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 11% of the time

Microsoft Active Directory vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

Okta Platform vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 6% of the time

ForgeRock vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 5% of the time

SailPoint Identity Security Cloud vs Ping Identity Platform

Compared 5% of the time

More Ping Identity Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Access Manager

February 2026

Download Oracle Access Manager product report

Buyer's Guide

Ping Identity Platform

February 2026

Download Ping Identity Platform product report

Also Known As

No data available

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

Overview

Oracle Access Manager delivers risk-aware end-to-end user authentication, single sign-on, and authorization protection, enabling enterprises to secure access from mobile devices and seamlessly integrate social identities with applications.

Oracle

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

SekerBank, University of Melbourne

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

Buyer's Guide

Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform

February 2026

Free Report: Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,744 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform report.

See our list of best Access Management vendors.

We monitor all Access Management 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.