If you are evaluating CyberArk alternatives for privileged access management (PAM) because CyberArk’s implementation timeline feels too long, the operational overhead feels too heavy, or the cost feels disproportionate to the number of accounts you need to protect, you are not alone.
Nearly one in two IT leaders describes PAM implementation complexity as a top challenge, and CyberArk is frequently cited as a complex platform in the category.
Compared to CyberArk, SplitSecure offers an easier-to-use, easier-to-deploy PAM alternative with team-based access control to split secrets across devices you control without requiring vault infrastructure, dedicated servers, or specialized engineering resources.
SplitSecure eliminates vault complexity while strengthening your security posture. Learn More.
In this article, we review CyberArk’s documentation and customer reviews on G2, Gartner Peer Insights, and PeerSpot to give you an honest, balanced comparison of CyberArk versus CyberArk alternatives like SplitSecure and show you the situations where each solution makes the most sense.
CyberArk’s Digital Vault is a hardened, tamper-resistant repository where all privileged credentials are stored securely. The Vault runs on a dedicated server protected by CyberArk's proprietary firewall, which blocks all communication except its own authenticated Vault protocol.
Access works through the Password Vault Web Access (PVWA) interface, which allows users and administrators to request, access, and manage credentials. The Privileged Session Manager (PSM) fetches credentials from the Vault and connects users to target systems without exposing actual passwords. The Central Policy Manager (CPM) handles automated credential rotation.
For organizations that need session recording, automated password rotation across thousands of endpoints, and deep integrations with enterprise IT service management tools, CyberArk provides capabilities that few competitors match.
However, as we explain below, though CyberArk has a powerful feature set, it can be a very complex tool to operate and deploy in real-world scenarios.
CyberArk is rated 4.4 stars on G2 and is consistently recognized as the PAM market leader in Gartner's Magic Quadrant for features like session management, rotation capabilities, and enterprise integrations.
However, these CyberArk Identity Security Platform features are only a positive if an organization has the expertise and resources to implement and configure them.
Based on the reviews we’ve read, the experiences of our team and their networks, we can see three clear reasons why security and IT teams might want to consider an alternative to CyberArk:
Below, we expand on each situation to help you decide whether CyberArk is the right fit for your organization or whether a CyberArk alternative, like SplitSecure, would be a better choice.
CyberArk's self-hosted architecture requires a dedicated Vault server, a PVWA web server, a PSM server, a CPM server, and typically a DR Vault for redundancy.
Each component must be configured, hardened, and maintained. If your IT team is small and everyone wears multiple hats, the operational overhead of running CyberArk can consume resources disproportionate to the security benefit.
Reviews on PeerSpot and G2 note that initial setup can take weeks to months, upgrades require careful planning across multiple components, and troubleshooting often requires CyberArk-specific expertise that is expensive to hire or contract.
SplitSecure deploys in as little as half an hour with no dedicated infrastructure. Learn More.
CyberArk's pricing is enterprise-grade, but the total cost of ownership extends far beyond licensing.
Organizations need dedicated servers, professional services for implementation, ongoing maintenance staff, and, often, a CyberArk-certified engineer on staff or retainer.
For mid-market organizations or teams protecting a smaller number of critical accounts, the investment may exceed what the use case requires.
If compliance is your primary driver, the question is whether you need CyberArk's full lifecycle credential management or whether you need to demonstrate to auditors that critical credentials are architecturally protected.
For DORA, SOX Section 404, NYDFS 500, PCI DSS 4.0, and HIPAA, SplitSecure's distributed architecture provides compliance by design because users cannot access a secret without creating an audit trail, and no single point of compromise can expose a complete credential.
CyberArk's Digital Vault stores complete credentials in a single, hardened location. The vault itself is well protected, but it is still a centralized target. If an attacker gains access to the vault, every credential it stores is potentially exposed.
For highest-sensitivity accounts and break glass credentials, some organizations will want to ensure these secrets are not stored in a single location.
This is not a criticism of CyberArk's security, but some organizations will have an architectural preference for the security accounts that represent catastrophic risk if compromised. In this scenario, an organization might use a solution like SplitSecure to protect high-sensitivity secrets while using CyberArk
SplitSecure takes a fundamentally different approach to secrets management than CyberArk.
Instead of storing complete credentials in a centralized vault, SplitSecure uses team-based access control to split secrets across a group of devices. No single device ever persists the protected credentials.
This is important because inside every enterprise, you have secrets protected by other secrets. Password managers protected by passwords, PAM platforms you need credentials to access, and so on. No matter how many layers you add, there is always a "last secret" protecting the entire system. SplitSecure solves this "last secret" problem.
When an employee wants to access a sensitive account protected by SplitSecure, their request is submitted to a “team” of devices. For example, their credentials might be protected by a team consisting of their iPhone, their laptop, and the enterprise’s Okta deployment
When these entities collectively confirm that the access request complies with company policy, access is granted automatically and invisibly in the background. Attackers would need to compromise multiple devices simultaneously (a 'threshold') to extract protected information.
Like CyberArk, SplitSecure provides separation of duties and audit trails. Unlike CyberArk, these properties are mathematical rather than policy-based. You cannot use the system without creating an audit record. And separation of duties is not a configuration setting, but a cryptographic property of how the architecture works.
Unlike CyberArk, SplitSecure leaves you with no complex vault infrastructure to manage. Any IT person can have SplitSecure up and running without specialist expertise.
If SplitSecure ceased operations tomorrow, your deployments would still function. Learn More.
For many organizations, CyberArk will be the best fit when used alongside a solution like SplitSecure. Below, we break down real-world scenarios based on team size, budget, and compliance requirements.
Their session recording, automated rotation, and integrations with enterprise ITSM tools make CyberArk well-suited for organizations managing thousands of privileged accounts with dedicated PAM engineering teams.
If your primary use case is full lifecycle management of credentials across a large, complex environment, CyberArk provides the right feature set.
If your security or IT team wears multiple hats and you cannot justify the infrastructure and staffing overhead of CyberArk, SplitSecure gives you cryptographic protection for your most sensitive accounts without the operational burden.
Deployment takes as little as half an hour, can be self-hosted and there is no vault server to maintain.
SplitSecure's architecture provides what we call "compliance by default."
For organizations subject to DORA, NYDFS, PCI DSS 4.0, SOX, or HIPAA, SplitSecure helps demonstrate to auditors that critical credentials are not stored in any centralized location and are not shared with any third party. Every access generates an audit record automatically.
When auditors ask whether a single compromised account could cause irreversible damage, the answer with SplitSecure is: "architecturally no."
Use CyberArk for operational credential management at scale.
Use SplitSecure for the 10-20 accounts that represent your organization's single points of catastrophic failure: AWS root credentials, domain admin accounts, and encryption keys that cannot be rotated quickly.
CyberArk and SplitSecure are not mutually exclusive. They address different parts of the problem.
SplitSecure's distributed model means a breach of your MSP does not become a breach of every client. Client credentials never exist as complete objects on your systems, so for managed service providers who need to access client infrastructure without holding client credentials, this is a structural advantage that vault-based solutions cannot match.
See how SplitSecure protects your most sensitive accounts with distributed secrets that never exist as complete objects in any single location.
No vault infrastructure to manage. No dedicated PAM engineering team required. A breach of our systems does not expose your credentials.
Want to talk to a real person? Contact us.
Our Blog
