We compared Auth0 and Microsoft Entra ID based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Auth0 stands out for its robust security measures, customizable authentication options, and extensive support for various platforms. Users appreciate its comprehensive documentation and responsive customer service. In comparison, Microsoft Entra ID is valued for its user-friendly interface, efficient authentication process, and seamless integration. Customers praise its exceptional customer service and support. Auth0 users suggest improvements in UI and scalability, while Microsoft Entra ID users seek enhancements in UI design, usability, customization options, and security features.
Features: Auth0's valuable features include easy integration, robust security measures, seamless single sign-on, and customizable authentication. Users appreciate its scalability, platform support, documentation, and customer support. Microsoft Entra ID offers a user-friendly interface, efficient authentication, seamless integration, and easy navigation. Users appreciate its reliability and convenience across platforms.
Pricing and ROI: Auth0's setup cost is deemed fairly priced, with a simple and straightforward setup process. Additionally, users appreciate the flexibility and clarity of Auth0's licensing options. On the other hand, Microsoft Entra ID's pricing is seen as affordable and competitive. Users find the setup process to be efficient and hassle-free, and appreciate the flexibility and options available for licensing. Overall, both products have positive user feedback regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing., Auth0's ROI is attributed to its reliability, integration, and secure authentication. Users value its ease of implementation and time-saving features. Microsoft Entra ID focuses on cost savings, efficiency, process streamlining, and productivity improvement.
Room for Improvement: Auth0 could benefit from improving its user interface design and making it more intuitive. Better documentation and clearer instructions are needed for setup and integration processes. In contrast, Microsoft Entra ID requires enhancements in user interface design, optimization for different devices, usability, sign-up process simplification, customization options, and advanced security features.
Deployment and customer support: The user reviews indicate that the time required for implementing a new tech solution with Auth0 can vary, ranging from three months for deployment to a week for setup. In contrast, users of Microsoft Entra ID reported spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, or just a week for both deployment and setup. The specific circumstances and context should be taken into account when evaluating the duration required for establishing a new tech solution., Customers who have used Auth0 have commended its customer service team for their prompt and helpful assistance. On the other hand, Microsoft Entra ID's customer service has been praised for being exceptional, efficient, and reliable, with users appreciating the effective communication and seamless problem resolution.
The summary above is based on 101 interviews we conducted recently with Auth0 and Microsoft Entra ID users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"It has a lot of customization and out-of-the-box features."
"It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"The most important thing for me is compliance. Everything that they have developed in Auth0 is already certified by many regulators such as ISO. So, we do not need to take care of that. We have the shared responsibility model to share assets with other products we are using in the cloud."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"The most valuable feature is Identity and Access Management. As an IT administrator, this feature allows me to manage access for users and groups."
"The best thing about Active Directory is its compatibility. It works with lots of third-party vendors. We're using multiple products, and they're all integrated with our Active Directory."
"The solution is free to use and you can use it for every service."
"This product is easy to use."
"The single sign-on is very convenient for us."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to deploy and make changes to every workstation that I need to. We use it to control policy and I can apply the right policies to all our 1,500 workstations, notebooks, et cetera."
"It's an easy product to maintain."
"Conditional Access, Geofencing, and Azure Multi-Factor Authentication are the major security features to secure resources."
"There is a possibility to improve the machine-to-machine authentication flow. This part of Auth0 is not really well documented, and we could really gain some additional knowledge on that."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"Adding a new account can be tricky."
"Microsoft should work on enhancing its machine-learning algorithm to prevent unnecessary lockouts of users."
"The solution could be cheaper."
"I would like to dive into some of the things that we saw today around the workflows at this Microsoft event. I cannot say that they need to make it better because I do not have much experience with it, but something that is always applicable to Microsoft is that they need to be able to integrate with their competitors. If you look at IDP, they do not integrate with Okta."
"I haven't had any issues with the product."
"I think there is room for improvement with actually discussing, and advertising Microsoft as a an authenticator. Many people just get confused and use Google, and I think if Microsoft would make more of an effort to penetrate the market, that would be key."
"The solution could be improved when it comes to monitoring and logging as these are the most critical areas in case something was to go wrong."
"The technical support could improve by having a faster response time."
Auth0 is ranked 5th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 14 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 190 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Has good documentation but improvement is needed in MFA and application configurations ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". Auth0 is most compared with Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access, ForgeRock and Microsoft Entra Verified ID, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and RSA SecurID. See our Auth0 vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors and best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.