Auth0 vs. PingOne from Ping Identity

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Auth0
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Auth0 is an identity management platform for developers and application teams. It gives users a platform to authenticate and authorize, providing secure access to applications, devices, and users. Auth0 aims to provide the simplicity, extensibility, and expertise to scale and protect any application, for any audience. Integrate Auth0 into any app, written in any language, and any framework.
$23
per month
PingOne from Ping Identity
Score 5.4 out of 10
N/A
The PingOne Cloud Platform from Ping Identity in Denver, Colorado is an identity management and access solution (IAM) for enterprises. Features of the products include single sign-on, multi-factor authentication, user management with directory, provisioning and deprovisioning. The solution is presented as a comprehensive, standards-based platform that allows users and devices to securely access any service, application or API from any device. Designed for hybrid IT environments, it can be…
$20,000
per year
Pricing
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Editions & Modules
1,000 External Active Users
$23
per month
2,000 External Active Users
$57
per month
5,000 External Active Users
$114
per month
500 External Active Machines
$130
per month
10,000 External Active Users
$228
per month
20,000 External Active Users
$455
per month
50,000 External Active Users
1,138
per month
Over 50,000 External Active Users
Contact for quote
Enterprise
Contact for quote
Essential
$20,000
per year
Plus
$40,000
per year
Premium
Contact Sales
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeOptionalNo setup fee
Additional DetailsTry PingOne for Customers for free. Sign up for a free 30-day trial of PingOne for customers.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Features
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Identity Management
Comparison of Identity Management features of Product A and Product B
Auth0
8.6
Ratings
0% above category average
PingOne from Ping Identity
6.5
Ratings
22% below category average
ID-Management Access Control8.20 Ratings8.80 Ratings
ID Management Single-Sign On (SSO)8.50 Ratings9.90 Ratings
Multi-Factor Authentication8.50 Ratings9.90 Ratings
Password Management00 Ratings8.80 Ratings
Account Provisioning and De-provisioning00 Ratings1.60 Ratings
ID Management Workflow Automation00 Ratings2.30 Ratings
ID Risk Management00 Ratings4.30 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Small Businesses

No answers on this topic

WatchGuard AuthPoint
WatchGuard AuthPoint
Score 9.1 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
OneLogin by One Identity
OneLogin by One Identity
Score 9.6 out of 10
OneLogin by One Identity
OneLogin by One Identity
Score 9.6 out of 10
Enterprises
OneLogin by One Identity
OneLogin by One Identity
Score 9.6 out of 10
OneLogin by One Identity
OneLogin by One Identity
Score 9.6 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Likelihood to Recommend
7.2
(0 ratings)
7.9
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
8.2
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
5.5
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.2
(0 ratings)
8.6
(0 ratings)
Configurability
6.4
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Auth0PingOne from Ping Identity
Likelihood to Recommend
Auth0 is very well suited for situations where a JSON web token can be used for authorizing APIs, websites, and mobile devices. It's especially useful if the JWT validation can happen at a gateway layer. It's especially useful if you only need to verify the user's email address or mobile number as the passwordless login is easy to implement.
Read full review
The products we're using work well and are reliable. We've had very few outages, and when we have, their support team has been highly responsive and addressed the issues quickly. They are very customer focused and have been great partners throughout the relationship. I'm looking to adopt more of their technologies over the coming year.
Read full review
Pros
  • Overall we had very good experience with Auth0. It supports industry standard language or technology for integration. Very good performance.
  • It's nice to work with Auth0's APIs and they are flexible.
  • The management and configuration dashboard is useful and easy to deal with.
Read full review
  • PingFederate is feature-rich, and quickly updated with the latest standards and profiles. This gives us more tools to apply identity standards to modern business challenges.
  • PingFederate and PingCentral were also easy to deploy within docker containers and weave into an infra-as-code deployment, keeping operational overhead low.
  • PingID has an array of supported authenticators for nearly every use case, and early FIDO2 support has us looking into moving to passwordless much more quickly than I had anticipated.
Read full review
Cons
  • Auth0 can be somewhat limiting if you want a lot of control over the design of your authentication flow. Custom branding can be done, but it may be limited depending on how you plan to integrate.
  • The Auth0 API documentation has proven confusing at times; a single API endpoint's behaviour will change based on inputs and configured settings (e.g. offline_access). Consequently fields that are advertised as being returned in a response might not be there or have different values if you miss a key detail and it can be difficult to debug when this happens. All information required is available in the documentation but requires some digging.
  • The toggle to switch tenants feels a bit odd, it works, but I've had a few instances where I didn't realize I was on a staging tenant looking for something that was on the production tenant. Not a big deal, just something to watch out for.
Read full review
  • I believe it is very secure & not sure if it needs any improvement as such
  • Only suggestion would be it should not ask users to re-confirm if the session is still active
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
For our purposes, Auth0 is still one of the best valued RBAC platforms in the market.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
- integration and ease of implementation - great over all product support specially for passkey biometric authentication -Auth0 is very reliable to use their API integration for security
verification. It provides best API to integrate our website and application
with Single Sign In option and two step verification option. Sales and technical teams are always there to provide support
Read full review
Easy to use; all UI's are user friendly and easy to learn.[The] possibility to use API is [a] big value as well. We really like integration with CyberArk; with it we can manage privileged accounts according to company standards without breaking any rules, and we can be 100% sure that only approved persons will have administrative access.
Read full review
Support Rating
There isn't a clear method to get a hold of support when trouble arises if you're on their standard plan. You can file a support ticket and they generally are responsive. I've often been able to find similar questions to the questions I've had when it comes to support in their ticket history, however, some have been closed without a satisfactory conclusion for the original poster.
Read full review
For our enterprise, they've assigned a customer success manager to ensure our needs are being addressed, and that person is top notch in knowing our priorities, enhancement requests, and open cases. Every time we've needed to engage support for a problem or a how-to question, they've been highly responsive and followed up with us to ensure the case was completely resolved. Their support personnel are highly skilled and trained. This is a very customer-centric company.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Auth0 is non-evasive and does not require software download. It is user friendly, seamless, and doesn't require additional actions on the part of the user. IBM Trusteer is none of these things and is based on a technology stack that cannot scale in the same way as Auth0. We believe Auth0 provides a superior solution and is well suited for our own technology stack.
Read full review
We tested PingOne but our security team was not happy with it (because of cloud exposure). We tested PingId as well but our security team was not happy with it (because of cloud exposure). We [spent] some time on PingDataGovernance but so far we don't have any use case for this product. We started exploration for PingDataSync (to synchronize two different LDAP directories), [and] so far it looks promising.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Development time has been allocated to the more core parts of our business.
  • We are confident in the security of our user's accounts and their data.
  • Auth0's login flows are customizable which means that we don't have to worry about users being confused when logging in/changing their passwords, and we didn't event have to spend that much time configuring this. (Full in-house development for login could take weeks to get right.)
Read full review
  • it is positive with saving the cost
  • some drawback with aging solution
  • directory is solid and provide lots of cost saving
Read full review
ScreenShots

Auth0 Screenshots

Screenshot of multi-factor authentication with Auth0Screenshot of Auth0's user interface tools. These help administrators manage user identities including password resets, creating and provisioning, blocking and deleting users.Screenshot of a view of the customer's digital experience; this includes smart recommendations based on previous behavior, an experience tailored specifically to their mobile device, and easy discovery of travel options.Screenshot of the Auth0 Identity Access Management platform, built on AWS. It is designed to deliver a universal authentication and authorization as a service for web, mobile and legacy applications.to 7000+ customers worldwide.Screenshot of Auth0’s Adaptive MFA, which is based on various types of behavioral signals, meaning the MFA step is only presented when deemed risky. This preserves the experience for the majority of users, while maintaining a strong security posture.