If we take anthropological point of view, which is comparative, then for instance, Judeo-Christian, Jain, and Buddhist ontologies are different. Now, I am not attempting to argue for the best choice, only pointing out that ontology has much to do with what people believe to be true about reality; and the form and content of their beliefs about the nature of reality are not indefinitely diverse but has variance.
A meta-ontological point that they all are religious traditions and therefore fall into some category or version of idealism or dualism, is acknowledged but as I tried to show, will not elucidate the sociopolitical implications of ontological differences between religious and other, including materialist, traditions. (For that matter, this is why anthropology struggles with the concept of religion itself.)