CyberArk PAM vs OneLogin

Feature comparison

CyberArk Privileged Access Manager is the reference platform for securing privileged accounts. Its core vault stores and rotates privileged credentials, session isolation and recording capture and replay administrator activity, and additional modules cover application and machine secrets, endpoint privilege management and cloud entitlements. CyberArk's newer Secure Infrastructure Access technology is cloud-ready with built-in high availability. The platform is engineered for organisations that must prove tight control over their most sensitive accounts to auditors and regulators.

OneLogin operates at the workforce layer. It provides single sign-on across SaaS and on-premises applications, multi-factor authentication including one-time passwords and biometric methods, directory synchronisation and identity lifecycle features in its higher tier. OneLogin is positioned as a straightforward, cost-effective access manager rather than a governance-heavy suite. The two products do not compete directly: OneLogin signs the workforce into applications, while CyberArk protects the privileged credentials those applications and their administrators rely on.

Pricing comparison

OneLogin publishes transparent per-user pricing: the Advanced plan is $4 per user per month with SSO and MFA, and the Professional plan is $8 per user per month adding identity lifecycle and HR-driven provisioning, with individual components such as SSO available from around $2. CyberArk does not publish list pricing. It is quoted per privileged account and by module, with a median annual contract near $30,000 and enterprise deployments commonly ranging from $150,000 to more than $2,000,000 depending on scale and whether the deployment is self-hosted or Privilege Cloud SaaS.

These figures reflect different populations. OneLogin is priced across the entire workforce at a low per-seat rate, whereas CyberArk is priced against the much smaller set of privileged accounts but at a far higher per-unit cost that reflects the assurance and audit depth it provides. A buyer comparing the two on headline price alone will misread them; the right comparison is the cost of securing the whole workforce front door versus the cost of securing the privileged tier.

Deployment, fit and limitations

OneLogin is SaaS and reaches production in days to weeks, suiting IT teams that want dependable SSO and MFA without a lengthy programme. CyberArk is a multi-month implementation involving vault deployment, connector configuration, credential onboarding and policy design, and it typically requires dedicated PAM expertise to run. CyberArk fits security teams in regulated industries; OneLogin fits cost-conscious organisations consolidating workforce access, often in mixed or non-Microsoft estates.

Each carries a clear limitation. CyberArk is complex, expensive and administratively heavy, and smaller organisations frequently find it more platform than they can operate. OneLogin is not a privileged access manager: it does not vault privileged credentials, rotate service passwords or record administrator sessions, and its integration catalogue and governance depth are smaller than market leaders such as Okta or Microsoft Entra. Buyers also weigh OneLogin's roadmap under One Identity ownership when planning multi-year commitments.

What buyers say

Buyers frequently note that CyberArk Privileged Access Manager sets the benchmark for privileged credential security, with reviewers crediting its vault, session recording and breadth of modules for satisfying demanding audit and compliance requirements. The most common criticism is operational weight: high cost, lengthy deployment and a steep learning curve that smaller teams struggle to sustain. OneLogin is praised for its simplicity, fast setup and competitive pricing, with reviewers highlighting reliable SSO and flexible MFA options. Recurring complaints concern a smaller application catalogue than the largest identity providers, lighter governance features and some uncertainty about the product roadmap following its move under One Identity. Across both, sentiment reinforces that they serve different needs: organisations rate CyberArk highly when they have the resources to operate it for privileged access, and rate OneLogin highly when they want affordable, no-friction workforce single sign-on rather than a heavyweight governance platform.

Recommendation

Choose CyberArk Privileged Access Manager when the priority is protecting privileged accounts, secrets and administrator sessions to a standard that satisfies regulators and auditors, and when the organisation has the budget and dedicated expertise to operate a full PAM programme. Choose OneLogin when the priority is affordable, quickly deployed workforce single sign-on and MFA across a SaaS estate without a governance-heavy implementation. The two are complementary rather than competing: a mature security programme often runs OneLogin or another identity provider at the workforce layer and CyberArk at the privileged layer, each scoped to the population and risk it is built to manage.

Alternatives to both