We performed a comparison between Google Cloud Identity and Microsoft Entra ID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"Google is always on its own. Google Cloud Identity is pretty good on every point."
"It's easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature of Google Cloud Identity is group access. You are able to assign policies to groups instead of users individually."
"The solution is primarily used for single control and single sign which helps with the security and authentication of multiple devices."
"Cloud Identity is scalable enough for our needs. It's serving more than 3,000 users in our organization."
"One of the most useful features was the single sign-on. You can use it as an identity provider or service provider. And you can use their organization unit feature to enable or disable some of the features for a specific group of users."
"It is a very stable solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten."
"The solution is moderate to difficult to use. I found the approach was practical. Following the steps made it very easy to use."
"The solution scales well."
"The most valuable feature is the single sign-on, which allows any application that is SAML or OAuth compatible to use Azure as an identity provider for seamless sign-in."
"Azure Active Directory has many automation capabilities, and you can apply policies on top. You can do a lot of things with these combinations and integrate other tools like PingFederate."
"It's multi-tenant, residing in multiple locations. The authentication happens quickly. Irrespective of whether I'm in Australia, the US, India, or Africa, I don't see any latency. Those are the good features that I rely on."
"The two-step authentication is the most valuable."
"It has things like conditional access. For example, if someone is accessing sensitive information, then we could force them to do multi-factor authentication. Therefore, we can stop access if it is coming from a location that we did not expect."
"Overall the solution functions very well, such as the ability to access it from the cloud."
"I like the downloads, availability for Android and iOS operating systems, and integration with Microsoft applications, such as Azure- and Office-based solutions. It is an excellent tool that helps with day-to-day business operations. I also like that I can install the app on my mobile."
"I want the tool to improve its support. It should also incorporate some functionalities. Currently, preparing presentations in Google is a pain point. The tool’s certain features like user provisioning are not intuitive as well. The product’s LDAP support is very poor. Clients do not trust the product due to the spam."
"Technical support is slow."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"If you want to set up some alerts, you don't have much control over the configuration. You have to use their default alerts. And they only provide alerts for certain activities, so you cannot customize those. Monitoring isn't very helpful either."
"I would like to see more integration in future releases."
"Google Cloud Identity the UI could improve."
"The one place it could be improved is the password vaulting. The password vaulting does not prevent the admins from reading users' passwords, and that's a debate."
"There is room for improvement in the configuration of their security policies. It seems quite basic."
"Sometimes, the notifications and alerts are not delivered properly, and we end up missing them. Also, the overall graphical user interface needs to be improved."
"Microsoft Authenticator can improve their notifications because sometimes, my team doesn't receive notifications about app updates and authentication failures."
"Microsoft services and most familiar third-party applications are currently supported, but we can't find many other platforms that integrate with Office 365 or Azure Active Directory. Microsoft should develop connectors for different applications and collaborate more with other vendors to cover a broader range of applications."
"The security policy of Azure Active Directory should be based on a matrix so that we can easily visualize which users have access to what."
"Compatibility features for legacy system integration with new features will be challenging at times."
"The price has room for improvement."
"It would be an improvement if Authenticator made it easier to recover the app if you reboot your cellphone and lose access."
"You can manage the users from the Office 365 administration center, and you can manage them from Azure Active Directory. Those are two different environments, but they do the same things. They can gather the features in one place, and it might be better if that place were Azure."
Google Cloud Identity is ranked 3rd in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 12 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 96 reviews. Google Cloud Identity is rated 7.6, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Google Cloud Identity writes "You don't need much expertise or previous experience to work with it". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves time, creates a single pane of glass, and offers good conditional access features". Google Cloud Identity is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Okta Workforce Identity, JumpCloud, VMware Workspace ONE and ManageEngine Endpoint Central, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Yubico YubiKey, Auth0, Microsoft Intune, Cisco Duo and RSA SecurID Access. See our Google Cloud Identity vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) 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.
