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

Ping Identity Platform vs Varonis Platform comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 12, 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

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Data Governance
9th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (3rd), Authentication Systems (5th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (6th), Access Management (4th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Varonis Platform
Ranking in Data Governance
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.3
Number of Reviews
13
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (12th), SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (8th), Compliance Management (8th), Ransomware Protection (9th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2025, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 0.3%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Varonis Platform is 8.2%, up from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Data Governance
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Frederic  Delos - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers the ability to identify sensitive areas, allowing you to drill down into the sensitive data
The most effective feature for me is its ability to identify sensitive areas, allowing you to drill down into the sensitive data, provided you have access, to determine whether it's a false positive or a true positive. That's the best thing for me, out of all of it. It's got everything, like other ones, but I like to be able to look at something if I'm doing forensics on the alert and say, "Okay, do I really need to do something with this?" For example, we don't want sensitive data in our OneDrive. So it identifies the sensitive data that's possibly in the OneDrive. And what I can do is look at it and identify whether it's actually sensitive data in Datalert or whether it looks like sensitive data, but I know it's a false positive. If it is a false positive, I can basically say ignore this pattern based on X, Y, and Z, you know, whether it's Redjax or keyword proximity. So I like that. With other tools, I gotta go through a whole process because it's a little bit more complex. Here, I can tag it and bag it in one shot. And the next good time I scan, it slips over it. So it helps in that.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It's pretty stable as a product."
"What I like best about PingID is that it's very user-friendly. PingID is well-built as a developer tool and regularly upgrades and updates via patches. I also like that PingID has clear documents that will help you integrate it with other solutions."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"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."
"I like the self-service feature. The 502 and UBP systems are also excellent. PingID's ability to authenticate with SSH, RDP, and Windows login is pretty handy. It covers the entire spectrum of use."
"I like PingFederate."
"From a security perspective, I highly value the product's biometric authentication methods such as FIDO, FaceID, YubiKey, and the mobile app."
"The analytics would have to be our most valuable feature."
"The 24/7 support is the most valuable feature. They have been able to answer support questions pretty quickly."
"The solution ensures that users have not accidentally shared sensitive information with the wrong people or too many people."
"On the Varonis side, technical support is phenomenal. Their ability to explain is very good, and they seem to be very knowledgeable. When I get an alert that doesn't quite make sense, they dive in there and kind of take me through it. That's very useful and very good. There are some false alerts, but it is better to have a false alert than no alert at all."
"The most important feature is remediation. In remediation support, there is no group permission. We'll go ahead and remediate the access from the Dell folder to the parent folder."
"The telemetry to capture everything and the reports are very easy to configure without having a developer degree."
"The solution's classification engine is highly configurable and efficient."
"It can easily identify unusual behavior or access patterns that may pose a potential threat, while operating as a unified reporting system."
 

Cons

"The solution should allow for better integration with other platforms and the UBT."
"There is room for improvement in the solution, particularly in security."
"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."
"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."
"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."
"It requires some expertise to set up and manage."
"PingID should put a little more effort into making a pretty self-explanatory deck about their tech features and the services they offer."
"Sometimes, there are issues with its stability."
"For unstructured data monitoring, it's one of the top ones, if not the top one, due to its usability."
"We have Microsoft Office 365. I just saw an article today which says that they're actually getting integrated with Microsoft Office 365, which would be a useful feature. For user-based reports, log on activity, and stuff like that, it doesn't seem to really be present like Log360. That could just be my inexperience with it. I've been dealing with it for only about two and a half months."
"The remediation process can be improved. There will be no existing permission group for the McAfee channel domains. We can create a new permissions group for the required folder."
"The solution's areas of improvement are the interface and the dependency on on-premises deployment for some components."
"There is one thing that if I add something manually, I get so many alerts. That's the biggest bad thing."
"It is significantly complex."
"I would like it to have cloud integration."
"I'd like to see automatic updates for this solution. Currently, it's a manual process to update all the keywords"
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product is costly."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"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."
"I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being the most expensive."
"Varonis Platform wasn't certainly the cheapest solution."
"The platform is expensive. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten."
"It's expensive, kind of, really expensive."
"Licensing is on an annual basis. Maintenance and renewal fees are separate. Varonis Datalert is quite expensive."
"You could do a subscription, where you pay yearly, or you could purchase it outright. The licensing cost is based on the number of users on the system that you are monitoring."
"The pricing is good. It neither expensive nor cheap. It is average."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
832,460 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What do you like most about Varonis Platform?
The solution has significantly improved data security and compliance posture by allowing us to track and monitor activities. We can see who accesses data and when files are created and understand w...
What needs improvement with Varonis Platform?
The solution's areas of improvement are the interface and the dependency on on-premises deployment for some components. The interface has improved with the move to a SaaS model, but aspects could s...
What is your primary use case for Varonis Platform?
Customers use the product to identify sensitive information, correlate it with access permissions, and utilize its automation engine for remediation. It includes fixing broken permissions and manag...
 

Also Known As

Ping Identity (ID), PingFederate, PingAccess, PingOne, PingDataGovernance, PingDirectory, OpenDJ
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Nottingham Building Society
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Varonis Platform and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
832,460 professionals have used our research since 2012.