Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Azure Front Door vs Microsoft Defender for Identity comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
6.9
Azure Front Door offers ROI through cost reduction, quick setup, and simplified management, prompting proactive adoption amid system phase-out.
Sentiment score
5.0
Microsoft Defender for Identity is cost-effective and efficient, offering incident prevention and resolution without complex hardware setups.
Azure Front Door offers a quick return on investment once it is set up.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
7.1
Azure Front Door's customer service is mixed; some praise responsiveness and documentation, others find problem-solving quality inconsistent.
Sentiment score
7.5
Opinions on Microsoft Defender for Identity support vary, highlighting responsiveness, but issues include delays, contact challenges, and false positives.
I am able to set up a critical call with Microsoft, and they respond quickly to tickets with the highest severity.
Generally, the support is more effective than other providers like Oracle.
The quality of support is very good, but troubleshooting can take time due to complex setups and the need to provide many logs.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.1
Azure Front Door offers scalable, reliable global capabilities, highly rated by users, though it may become costly with extensive use.
Sentiment score
7.9
Microsoft Defender for Identity efficiently integrates and scales globally, supporting diverse organizational needs within Microsoft’s ecosystem effectively.
I find that Front Door can become expensive for large-scale projects with more transactions and users.
Scaling can be done anytime as needed.
In a Microsoft-centric organization, especially with Azure infrastructure and Office 365, Microsoft Defender for Identity is scalable.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.4
Azure Front Door is praised for stability and performance, with minor DNS issues and advantages in updates via Azure Portal.
Sentiment score
7.2
Microsoft Defender for Identity is highly reliable, with minimal incidents, seamless operation, and consistent ratings between seven and nine.
I rate Azure Front Door's stability a nine because it is easy to make updates through Azure Portal.
We do not see any issues with the stability of Microsoft Defender for Identity.
Microsoft Defender for Identity is quite robust and built on Azure hyperscale infrastructure, with a 99% availability.
Having recently started using it, reliability is affirmed, but manual investigation is often performed to verify if alerts identified by auto-remediation are accurate.
 

Room For Improvement

Azure Front Door needs improvements in multi-cloud support, pricing, user interface, DDoS protection, and enhanced functionalities as per feedback.
Microsoft Defender for Identity users seek improved cloud integration, user-friendly features, better support, and streamlined processes for enhanced threat management.
If I could use Azure Front Door with private IP addresses, it would be more beneficial.
It relies on the WAF module where users must configure rate-limiting rules, as it does not automatically sense malicious spikes in traffic.
The only significant adjustment required is with URL set parameters that need to be passed for an existing domain.
If Microsoft could develop a feature that indicates when impossible travel is caused by VPN connections, it would prevent unnecessary password resets and session disruptions, especially for VIP users in organizations.
One improvement I would recommend is the integration of an admin application within Teams, allowing easy access to attack information on a mobile platform.
Reducing false positives is something we've been working on with Microsoft.
 

Setup Cost

Azure Front Door offers flexible, tiered pricing praised for balancing cost and features, though premium levels may seem expensive.
Microsoft Defender for Identity is cost-effective with E5 licenses despite complex pricing and competitive against other security solutions.
Azure Front Door is cheaper for small projects, companies, or applications compared to using separate tools.
If they can reduce the costs, organizations will be happy, and it will compensate for using the Azure environment, which is more expensive on the infrastructure as a service side.
From an organization perspective, using E5 licenses is value for money, especially if Azure and Office 365 are already in use.
Ensuring a fair price according to market standards.
 

Valuable Features

Azure Front Door enhances security, performance, and global reach with features like SSL offloading, load-balancing, and traffic analytics.
Microsoft Defender for Identity integrates with Azure to offer comprehensive threat detection, identity protection, and advanced real-time security insights.
Azure Front Door includes a built-in web application firewall, which performs signature-based checks of the request payload, offering protection against common attacks or malicious requests.
Azure Front Door provides DDoS protection and features related to WAF.
We receive an advance report of risky users, allowing us to take preemptive action before an attack causes damage to organization details.
Based on the detection of incidents, we can prevent issues, and if there are any identity-related alerts, they are prevented through a conditional access policy.
I find the most valuable features in Microsoft Defender for Identity to be the conditional access and the rule-based access control to give users their actual role-based permission to work.
 

Categories and Ranking

Azure Front Door
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
18th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
16
Ranking in other categories
CDN (2nd), Web Application Firewall (WAF) (13th)
Microsoft Defender for Iden...
Ranking in Microsoft Security Suite
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) (6th), Identity Threat Detection and Response (ITDR) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Microsoft Security Suite category, the mindshare of Azure Front Door is 2.5%, down from 2.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Identity is 6.9%, down from 7.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Microsoft Security Suite
 

Featured Reviews

SayedAbdelrhman - PeerSpot reviewer
Provide bot protection and has proficient documentation
During our discussion with the internal Microsoft team about assessing our environment, they confirmed that we have sufficient security measures, especially regarding edge protection. Internally, we believe we are now certified. In the future, we could consider adding layer four protection from the firewall. Front Door combines CDN and WAF protection, so further enhancing its features could benefit both the customer and us. We monitor the number of users attempting to access our IP or DNS servers. When designing the system, we initially needed to ensure our environment was protected with a WAF. However, WAF is currently too costly for us, so we created private links and connected them to Front Door. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
ROBERT-CHRISTIAN - PeerSpot reviewer
Integration within the ecosystem enhances collaboration and automates functionalities
The integration into the Microsoft Defender ecosystem is the most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Identity. It fits very nicely with all the other Defender tools, allowing for excellent collaboration among them. It also fits seamlessly into Microsoft Sentinel SIEM. Furthermore, Microsoft security solutions can save time as they allow the automation of numerous functionalities, and the reporting inside the Microsoft ecosystem is commendable.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Microsoft Security Suite solutions are best for your needs.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What's the difference between Azure Front Door and Application Gateway?
We found Azure Front Door to be easily scaled and very stable. The implementation is very fast and Microsoft provides excellent support. Azure Front Door can quickly detect abnormalities before the...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Front Door?
I am not sure about the pricing but believe Azure Front Door might require a higher cost due to its entry point nature.
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Identity?
Microsoft Defender for Identity provides excellent visibility into threats by leveraging real-time analytics and data intelligence.
What needs improvement with Microsoft Defender for Identity?
Microsoft can improve Microsoft Defender for Identity by ensuring that installation prerequisites are included in the setup process. Installing the solution presents challenges as numerous logs and...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft Defender for Identity?
My personal use case for Microsoft Defender for Identity is that it is amazing. It provides very good and deep analytics about whatever is happening in the on-premises Active Directory. The sensors...
 

Also Known As

Azure Front-Door
Azure Advanced Threat Protection, Azure ATP, MS Defender for Identity
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Microsoft Defender for Identity is trusted by companies such as St. Luke’s University Health Network, Ansell, and more.
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Front Door vs. Microsoft Defender for Identity and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.