No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Oracle Access Manager vs Ping Identity Platform comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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
14th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.4
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ping Identity Platform
Ranking in Access Management
7th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
32
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (6th), Authentication Systems (10th), Data Governance (18th), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (8th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (3rd), Directory Servers (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the Access Management category, the mindshare of Oracle Access Manager is 2.0%, down from 2.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ping Identity Platform is 5.3%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Access Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Ping Identity Platform5.3%
Oracle Access Manager2.0%
Other92.7%
Access Management
 

Featured Reviews

Upendar G - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Consultant at Wipro Limited
Efficiently manage applications with secure single sign-on and streamlined operations
Access Manager allows us to efficiently manage a broad spectrum of applications while ensuring secure, single-page application access. Its ability to consolidate applications on a single interface streamlines operations significantly. The product is highly secure and reliable, especially in managing user access across various platforms. Multi-factor authentication enhances security by requiring additional verification steps.
AmitRathod - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Analyst at Toll Holdings Limited
Single sign-on has simplified access while adaptive authentication protects complex user journeys
Regarding areas for improvement in Ping Identity Platform, there is not much. In terms of licensing and implementation costs, it has premium pricing, and it has a very complex implementation. It provides greater feasibility, but it takes a very long time in terms of complete building. There is a very limited number of legacy support, which can pose potential difficulties in integrating with certain older or legacy systems. Additionally, issue troubleshooting can be difficult at times. Sometimes issues can be difficult to diagnose and require extensive technical expertise. There is also a very steep learning curve for administrative purposes and potential difficulties with offline authentication scenarios.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most important functions of Oracle Access Manager are single sign-on and its integration capability with different applications."
"My company has used most features of Oracle Access Manager for various implementations, but the most helpful feature of the solution for the business and customers is single sign-on."
"We have not had issues surrounding any failure or instability, and we use it with remote work to access our applications from anywhere, 24/7."
"Excellent SSO solution for Oracle products."
"I find the authentication module, authentication scheme, and security policy most useful in Oracle Access Manager."
"The MFA is the most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable features of Oracle Access Manager are the single sign-on capability and a very robust platform that can take a high number of authentication and authorization requests, and it is very flexible."
"The stability of the solution is good, we have never had any issues and neither have any of our clients."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
"PingID is very good, it's pretty stable as a product and we've never faced any issues, at least with the data applications integration, and the customers really like it."
"PingFederate is a good product but there are limitations."
"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is multifactor authentication."
"We use the product to run different reports."
"This is a user-friendly solution."
 

Cons

"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the interface."
"The performance of Oracle Access Manager could be improved. It should be quick to install, but it wasn't, so this is another area for improvement. The Oracle Access Manager console also has room for improvement because it's slow."
"The initial implementation can definitely be improved because you have to work on several components to configure it correctly."
"Technical support needs improvement, they could be 200% better. The reason that most people are having problems is because of the support they provide."
"Oracle Access Manager is not very suitable or too heavy for cloud-native environments and needs more customization and configuration compared to authorization servers such as Keycloak or WSO2 Identity Server."
"Installation and deployment take time, but implementation is straightforward and easy, and they have very good support."
"May not integrate easily with non-Oracle products."
"Multi-factor authentication requires a lot of processes and technicalities."
"One significant challenge was ensuring smooth user migration during system upgrades in Ping."
"For external customers, they do have challenges, although there are solutions for that available, as well."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"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."
"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."
"There is room for improvement in the solution, particularly in security."
"In terms of licensing and implementation costs, it has premium pricing, and it has a very complex implementation."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price is really good and it is flexible because they have CPU licenses. The license is a one-time-only purchase."
"Can be expensive as a solution."
"The tool is affordable."
"The product is a little expensive."
"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."
"Ping offers flexible pricing that's not standardized."
"Ping Identity Platform is not an expensive solution."
"Compared to some SaaS-based solutions, the platform is relatively cost-effective."
"The pricing is neither too expensive nor too cheap."
"The tool is quite affordable."
"The platform's value justifies the pricing, especially considering its security features and scalability."
"PingID's pricing is pretty competitive."
"Ping Identity Platform is not very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Access Management solutions are best for your needs.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Outsourcing Company
11%
Construction Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business16
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise9
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise22
 

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 ...
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...
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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for PingFederate?
Regarding pricing for Ping Identity Platform, I would rate it eight out of ten.
What needs improvement with PingAccess?
The areas where I think PingFederate needs room for improvement include that the most significant area I would recommend is that things such as redirects still do not have majority of the applicati...
What is your primary use case for PingAccess?
The main use case for PingFederate is that we are maintaining the centralized single sign-on with DuroSengel and Carabras as the two main instances to review. If any application is hosted outside o...
 

Also Known As

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

Overview

 

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
Find out what your peers are saying about Oracle Access Manager vs. Ping Identity Platform and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
917,433 professionals have used our research since 2012.