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

Ping Identity Platform vs Yubico YubiKey comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Authentication Systems
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (4th), Data Governance (6th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (5th), Access Management (3rd), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (2nd), Directory Servers (1st)
Yubico YubiKey
Ranking in Authentication Systems
7th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Passwordless Authentication (2nd), Multi-Factor Authentication (MFA) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of December 2024, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 3.9%, down from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Yubico YubiKey is 11.0%, down from 11.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems
 

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.
OmerKhan1 - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable solution that is efficient, user-friendly, and easy to use
It would be better if the product can come up with a serial number for the keys. It would be nice if they had a numbering system as a configuration identity that would help the IT and technical teams to identify the keys because they look all the same. It would be more like putting a tag on them.

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."
"It's convenient for users to log in through Ping using the Kerberos adapter because it doesn't require them to authenticate again."
"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."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
"The product's most valuable features include its cloud-based capabilities for handling cloud applications and providing authentication and authorization through OIDC and SAML. It also supports integrations needed for both local and internal applications, including legacy applications requiring web server access."
"From a security perspective, I highly value the product's biometric authentication methods such as FIDO, FaceID, YubiKey, and the mobile app."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"The solution is simple to use and we have installed it in our clients' endpoints. The tool is just plug-and-play for the end user. The end user can just put in the key to the security computer and log in without any hassle. The solution is efficient, user-friendly, and easy to use."
"It's small and lightweight. Like a phone, it doesn't run out of battery. It also doesn't have to be unlocked. It doesn't break. Moreover, they're very durable and it's very convenient."
"The most valuable feature of Yubico YubiKey is security."
"YubiKey is a hardware security device with advanced security features."
 

Cons

"The solution should allow for better integration with other platforms and the UBT."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"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."
"PingAccess can only have one token provider, and you cannot enable two different token providers simultaneously."
"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 product's community has certain shortcomings that require improvement."
"We can choose a drop-down to search for which certificate we have to create, which is difficult."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"Yubico YubiKey is inconvient. No one likes the idea of having to put a USB device into the system, having to remember to take it out, and having passwords. It may be very good for security but it is not great for people to use."
"It would be better if the product can come up with a serial number for the keys. It would be nice if they had a numbering system as a configuration identity that would help the IT and technical teams to identify the keys because they look all the same. It would be more like putting a tag on them."
"Currently, an area where the product lacks is in addressing service needs."
"It's a hardware device, so it isn't cost-effective to use for all your accounts. You might have a hard time getting budget approval. It's better to take a strategic approach and use it only for critical accounts. You can use other forms of authentication for the rest."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The product is costly."
"We paid 100 bucks for one Yubikey."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
25%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Healthcare Company
6%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

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 Yubico YubiKey?
The solution is simple to use and we have installed it in our clients' endpoints. The tool is just plug-and-play for the end user. The end user can just put in the key to the security computer and ...
What needs improvement with Yubico YubiKey?
It would be better if the product can come up with a serial number for the keys. It would be nice if they had a numbering system as a configuration identity that would help the IT and technical tea...
What is your primary use case for Yubico YubiKey?
We use YubiKey to authenticate online services with email, web, and Twitter. We deploy it for some sensitive administrative accounts to improve security.
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Equinix, Land O'Lakes, CDPHP, Box, International SOS, Opower, VSP, Chevron, Truist, Academy of Art University, Northern Air Cargo, Repsol
Google Inc., Salesforce, Novartis, Facebook, GitHub, CERN, Duke University, Code Enigma, Luther Burbank High School, ZorgSaam, Agfa, Santa Clara County Fire Department, Dyson Ltd, Portugal Telecom, Boral, Canonical Ltd
Find out what your peers are saying about Ping Identity Platform vs. Yubico YubiKey and other solutions. Updated: December 2024.
824,053 professionals have used our research since 2012.