# PAM Tools Compared: Five Platforms Scored Side by Side

Source: https://startwithidentity.com/rankings/best-pam-tools/
Last updated: 2026-09-20
License: content by Start with Identity. Cite the source URL.

---

This is a side-by-side scorecard, not a shopping list. Five [privileged access management](https://startwithidentity.com/guides/fundamentals/what-is-pam/) platforms are scored against the same rubric so you can see where they actually diverge rather than where their marketing does.

## Where this category splits

PAM is really two products sold under one label, and picking the wrong half is the most common shortlisting error.

**Vault-first enterprise suites** (CyberArk, BeyondTrust, Delinea) are built around credential vaulting, session isolation and recording, and the audit trail that comes with them. They assume privileged accounts exist and must be controlled. They are what auditors recognise, and they carry real operational weight.

**Infrastructure-access tools** (Teleport, HashiCorp Boundary) are built around short-lived certificates and eliminating standing credentials entirely. They assume engineers need access to servers, clusters and databases, and they optimise for that daily workflow. They are lighter to run and far better liked by the people using them, but they are not what a bank examiner is expecting to see.

Scoring them on one scale is useful for capability breadth and misleading for fit. Read the split first, then the scores.

## What has changed in the market

Ownership has moved more than capability. CyberArk now sits inside Palo Alto Networks and was rebranded Idira in May 2026. Delinea acquired StrongDM in March 2026, which closes much of its historical gap on developer-facing access. Both facts matter more to a five-year decision than a decimal point of capability score.

## How to read these scores

Every vendor here is scored on the same [10-dimension rubric](https://startwithidentity.com/methodology/): authentication, SSO and federation, authorization, lifecycle and provisioning, MFA and passwordless, governance and audit, developer experience, deployment flexibility, pricing transparency, and support ecosystem. Scores are comparative within the category, not absolute. A 4.5 here means strong relative to peers solving the same problem, not strong relative to every identity product.

Three things the scores deliberately do not capture. They do not price your deployment, because most vendors in this category quote rather than publish. They do not measure how well a product fits your existing stack, which is usually the deciding factor. And they do not predict vendor stability, which in identity has mattered more than features lately given the pace of consolidation.

Use this page to narrow a field to two or three candidates on capability. Then pilot them against your worst case, not the vendor's reference architecture.

## Where to go next

For the full commercial field rather than five, see [top 10 PAM solutions](https://startwithidentity.com/articles/top-10-pam-solutions-2026/). For self-hosted options, see [top open-source PAM solutions](https://startwithidentity.com/articles/top-7-open-source-pam-solutions/). For the evaluation process itself, see [how to choose a PAM solution](https://startwithidentity.com/guides/buyer-guides/how-to-choose-a-pam-solution/). To browse every profile we hold, see the [PAM vendor directory](https://startwithidentity.com/vendors/pam/).