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.
"The most valuable feature of the product is scalability."
"I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"It is very scalable because it provides a new environment for companies based on their number of users and other factors. The tool can take a lot of users."
"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 most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"Every feature in Microsoft Entra ID plays a crucial role in overall security."
"For some applications, it's not only working for authentication but it's also being used to apply roles for users. From the management perspective, it's much better to have this because in the past we constantly needed to go into the console of the different solutions and create or delete users or modify their roles and permissions. Now, with Azure Active Directory, we can do that from a single point. That makes our management model much easier."
"The technical support is pretty good."
"Multi-factor authentication (MFA) has improved our customers' security posture. Multi-factor authentication has two layers of authentication, which helps in case you input your credentials into a phishing website and then it has access to your credentials. So if they use your credentials, then you have proof on your phone that was sent to the end user."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Entra ID is its security options, where we can provide highly effective security for user accounts during authentication."
"Technical support has been great."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to act as an identity provider for other cloud-based, SaaS applications. In our bank, this is the main identity provider for such features."
"The single sign-on of the solution is the most valuable aspect."
"In the past, there was an issue with the multi-tenant where there wasn't the ability to manage them."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"My problem with Azure AD is that it's designed for medium to large systems, and we're not that large."
"The solution has certain limitations. For example, it has very little governance functionality."
"When it comes to identity and access life cycle management for applications that are run on-premises, as well as access governance, if those kinds of capabilities could be built into Azure Active Directory, that would be good."
"It would be awesome to have a feature where you can see the permissions of a user in all their Azure subscriptions. Right now, you have to select a user, then you have to select the subscription to see which permissions the user has in their selected subscriptions. Sometimes, you just want to know, "Does that user have any permissions in any subscriptions?" That would be awesome if that would be available via the portal."
"The documentation, and the way that people are notified of updates, are things that can be improved. I'm a big fan of Microsoft products but the way they document is not that great."
"The thing that is a bit annoying is the inability to nest groups. Because we run an Azure hybrid model, we have nested groups on-premise which does not translate well. So, we have written some scripts to kind of work around that. This is a feature request that we have put in previously to be able to use a group that is nested in Active Directory on-premise and have it handled the same way in Azure."
"The support could be better. Lately, they sort of dropped off a bit in terms of quality."
"For example, there were some authentication features that, for security purposes, had certain limitations. Those limitations still exist, but the portal now has options so that the customers can make custom features to manage their identity."
Auth0 is ranked 3rd 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 "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". Auth0 is most compared with Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access, ForgeRock and SAP Customer Data Cloud, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Cisco Duo and SailPoint IdentityIQ. 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.