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
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)
Varonis Platform
Ranking in Data Governance
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (9th), SaaS Security Posture Management (SSPM) (5th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (8th), Compliance Management (8th), Ransomware Protection (8th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (5th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Data Governance category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 0.3%, up from 0.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Varonis Platform is 10.2%, up from 6.2% 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

"I work on the application onboarding process because we have multiple customers and get data from different sources."
"PingFederate is very flexible. We can do many customizations, and it also provides an SDK to tailor it to our specific requirements. There are also numerous plugins available. I've worked with tools like ForgeRock and Okta, but I find PingFederate to be the most customizable."
"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 solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."
"It offers robust features and customization options that justify the cost."
"I like PingFederate."
"Setting up the infrastructure with Ping Identity Platform is very easy compared to other IAM products."
"The 24/7 support is the most valuable feature. They have been able to answer support questions pretty quickly."
"There's also a 90-day policy where if a user is not using the warehouse, it will automatically delete that username."
"The solution's classification engine is highly configurable and efficient."
"Varonis Platform is transparent and captures everything in the environment without impacting the performance. The tool helps us unify data feeds into a single reporting system."
"Varonis offers robust data access governance, allowing us to understand which sensitive data exists and who has access to it."
"It can easily identify unusual behavior or access patterns that may pose a potential threat, while operating as a unified reporting system."
"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 what's happening in our environment."
"The solution ensures that users have not accidentally shared sensitive information with the wrong people or too many people."
 

Cons

"One significant challenge was ensuring smooth user migration during system upgrades in Ping."
"Currently, the main integration is SAML-based, but other integration methodologies need to be supported."
"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."
"PingID classifies the type of environment into internal and external, which is an area for improvement because you need to take additional steps to trust internal and external users."
"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."
"In Ping Identity, we have had some issues. We've worked with logging and troubleshooting, including some firewall and security issues."
"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 has a long way to go until it is a cloud-based solution."
"I'd like to see automatic updates for this solution. Currently, it's a manual process to update all the keywords"
"I would like it to have cloud integration."
"There is one thing that if I add something manually, I get so many alerts. That's the biggest bad thing."
"The solution's areas of improvement are the interface and the dependency on on-premises deployment for some components."
"The solution's interface is a little complicated with regard to setting up filters and reports."
"Varonis requires more access permissions for its core functions compared to competitors, which can be a concern for companies about data safety."
"One area for improvement is the calculation engine. When applying rules in Varonis, especially for large datasets (terabytes of data), the calculations can be slow and require time to process. Speeding up this process would be beneficial."
"Varonis requires more access permissions for its core functions compared to competitors, which can be a concern for companies about data safety."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"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."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"The product is costly."
"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."
"Varonis Platform wasn't certainly the cheapest solution."
"The pricing is good. It neither expensive nor cheap. It is average."
"I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten, with ten being the most expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Data Governance solutions are best for your needs.
848,207 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
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
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?
Varonis started as an on-premises solution and is transitioning to cloud. It hasn't fully moved yet, which is an area for improvement. Varonis requires more access permissions for its core function...
What is your primary use case for Varonis Platform?
The primary use case for Varonis Platform is data discovery, specifically for discovering sensitive data in our organization to protect it. We are looking for a solution that can scan our repositor...
 

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: March 2025.
848,207 professionals have used our research since 2012.