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."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is that it is simple to integrate, irrespective of your codebase."
"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)."
"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."
"It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"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."
"The most valuable feature is the ease with which a person can log in remotely using only a password or pin without creating a profile or policy."
"It's very good at not disrupting the user experience."
"The most valuable features of Azure ID are the single sign-on and OpenID Connect authentication."
"Microsoft Entra ID Protection and Microsoft Sentinel are both excellent monitoring features for Microsoft Entra ID."
"User and device management is the most valuable feature."
"The valuable features I use daily are enterprise application, conditional access, identity governance, password monitoring, and a password reset."
"The solution's ease of use is one of its most valuable features."
"One of the most important is the Conditional Access. It helps affect a Zero Trust strategy positively."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"In the past, there was an issue with the multi-tenant where there wasn't the ability to manage them."
"The Management API could be improved so it's easier to get user information."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"The tool's price should be improved."
"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."
"Its price should be improved. It is very expensive for Turkish people."
"We previously used Microsoft's technical support, which was excellent; they were very responsive. Now, we use a CSP, and their support is lacking, so I rate them five out of ten."
"I rate Microsoft support five out of 10. It's just okay."
"One thing that they need to improve is the cost."
"The solution has certain limitations. For example, it has very little governance functionality."
"The visibility in the GUI is not good for management. There are a lot of improvements that could make it better. It should be more user-friendly overall. It is not user-friendly because everything keeps changing on the platform. I can understand it because I know the platform, am familiar with it, and use it every day. However, for a lot of clients, they don't use it every day or are not familiar with it, so it should be more user friendly."
"The product needs to improve its support."
"Compared to what we can do on-prem, Azure AD lacks a feature for multiple hierarchical groups. For example, Group A is part of group B. Group B is part of group C. Then, if I put someone into group A, which is part of already B, they get access to any system that group B has access to, and that provisioning is automatically there."
Auth0 is ranked 3rd in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 13 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 190 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Provides interface application integration, but Management API needs to be improved". 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 Okta Workforce Identity, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, Yubico YubiKey, 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.