We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and One Identity Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity Management (IM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The administrative features and SoD are valuable."
"The teams we work with at Omada provide great insights and support. Overall, it has been a pleasure working with them. That's the part we value the most."
"It has a lot of out-of-the-box features. It is flexible, and there are a lot of possibilities to configure and extend it. It is user-friendly. It has an interface that is end-user or business-user friendly."
"The most valuable feature for us is the ability to set up connectors to various IT systems and offer a wide range of supported connectors."
"The most valuable functionality of the solution for us is that when employees stop working for the municipality, they are automatically disabled in Active Directory. Omada controls that 100 percent. They are disabled for 30 days, and after that time Omada deletes the Active Directory account. The same type of thing happens when we employ a new person. Their information is automatically imported to Omada and they are equipped with the roles and rights so they can do their jobs."
"The identity lifecycle support is definitely valuable because we are a complex organization, and there is a lot of onboarding, movement, and offboarding in our organization. We have 31,000 users, and there are a lot of users who are constantly onboarding, offboarding, and moving. So, we need to make sure that these activities are supported. In old times, we used to do everything manually. Everyone was onboarded, offboarded, or moved manually. So, from a business point of view and an economics point of view, identity lifecycle is most valuable. From a security point of view, access review is the most important feature for us."
"It scales in terms of numbers and types of identities. It can govern the on-premise applications as well as the cloud applications. So, it can manage hybrid environments with all types of identities and various load amounts."
"You can make resources. You can import them from Azure or Active Directory and put them in an application. For example, if there is an application that uses a lot of Active Directory groups, you can make the groups available for people. If they need to access that application, you can tell them the resource groups you have for that application. People can do everything by themselves. They do not need anybody else. They can just go to the Omada portal, and they can do it all by themselves. That is terrific."
"It helps us with maintaining enterprise identities."
"It is one of those costs where you can't really quantify a return on investment. In the grand scheme of things, if we didn't have it, we would probably have a lot more breaches. It would be a lot harder to detect issues because we would have people using static usernames and passwords for various sites, making us open to a lot more attacks. The amount of security and benefit that we get out of it is not quantifiable but the return of investment from a qualitative point of view is much higher than not having it."
"It's a quite comprehensive solution and it scales quite well within our required scale as well, which is very useful."
"It's pretty easy to implement."
"Let's say we decide that our users need to have MFA, multi-factor authentication. It is very easy to implement that with Azure Active Directory."
"As an end-user, the access to shared resources that I get from using this product is very helpful."
"The tool's most valuable feature is conditional access."
"We can centralize and manage everything much more effectively with this tool."
"The company policies feature is really good because in workflows you can check whether the policies are all working."
"We have been able to make our help desk self-sufficient by giving them role-based access. We have been able to reduce service dependency by 40% to 50%."
"The business role management feature is pretty good because we have a lot of dynamic roles, and you can configure it with the filters."
"It's a huge toolkit, and you can do a lot of stuff with it. You can extend nearly everything, so if you want to build something that may not have been though of by the vendor. Compared with other distributors who design their products to certain specification, you can put in your own processes, because not all companies function the same. You can write what you want, and the process should be like that."
"This solution is quite flexible. We have a lot of customization since we have our own business processes."
"The solution is a typical, conventional IGA but the tool itself offers many options for customization."
"The back-end, its capabilities, and workflows are very good."
"It is a flexible because it is customizable. It allows you to build anything on top of it."
"The comprehensiveness of Omada's out-of-the-box connectors for the applications we use could be better. We are getting a new HR system called Cornerstone for which they do not have an out-of-the-box connector, so we have to take the REST connector and play around with it."
"We are trying to use Omada's standards and to adapt our processes. But we have had some trouble with the bad documentation. This is something that they could improve on. It has not been possible for us to analyze some of the problems so far, based on the documentation. We always need consultants. The documentation should include some implementation hints and some guidelines for implementing the processes."
"When you do a recalculation of an identity, it's hard to understand what was incorrect before you started the recalculation, and which values are actually updated... all you see are all the new fields that are provisioned, instead of seeing only the fields that are changed."
"The account management integration isn't bad, but it isn't plug-and-play like Microsoft Azure. You need some deep development knowledge to set up the connectors."
"Its flexibility is both a good thing and a bad thing. Because it is very flexible, it also becomes too complex. This is common for most of the products we evaluated. Its scalability should be better. It had a few scalability issues."
"The architecture of the entire system should also be less complex. The way they process the data is complex."
"They need to improve the cost for small companies."
"The reporting and importing have room for improvement."
"There is no great solution in the cloud for Conditional Access authentication and RADIUS-type authentication."
"Sometimes, what one customer may like, another may not like it. We have had customers asking, "Why is Microsoft forcing us to do this?" For example, when you use Exchange Server on-premise, then you can customize it for your company and these customizations are unlimited. However, if you use Exchange Online or with Microsoft 365, then your ability to make modifications is limited. So, only the cloud versus is limited."
"There are some features, where if you want to access them, then you need to make use of PowerShell. If someone is not really versed in PowerShell scripting, then they would definitely have issues using some of those features in Azure Active Directory."
"The most challenging aspect I found was the creation of organizational units and specific domains. They have a tool called Bastion, which is expensive and a little bit confusing."
"Tech support is inconsistent."
"I would like them to improve the dashboard by presenting the raw data in a more visual way for the logs and events. That would help us understand the reports better."
"If any service is down, it can affect a whole region. We would need to wait on a ticket and get word from Microsoft to understand the issues. If it takes longer to resolve the issue on Microsoft's side, all we can do is wait for them to fix it."
"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 philosophy behind One Identity Manager has always been that there's not one way of working and that you can set it up according to your own identity and access management philosophy, but what would make it better is by shortening the setup time and the learning curve time. If the team could create some best practices with a wizard to set the solution up within companies, that would be a killer feature and would help make identity access management more approachable. That would also help companies that don't have the resources or a dedicated team to set up One Identity Manager. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is the addition of just released application governance parts. That would sound promising. It would also be interesting if the team sets up best practice startup wizards, so you could set up One Identity Manager according to selectable best practice wizards instead of setting it up completely by yourself."
"The user interface needs to improve."
"There are a few aspects of One Identity Manager's user experience that could be improved."
"The tool to develop the web portal needs improvement."
"Some internal structures are in place because of already depreciated functions back from the time when the solution was used for software deployment and as a help desk."
"The user experience is good, but it can be improved. There are a lot of features in the administration part, and they need better documentation. For example, they need to explain the main reason for a feature, and what the tables are in the database. It needs better documentation about all the features that are in the solution."
"Make the logging and debugging easier to find, because I'm always confused, "Where do I have to go to turn this log on if I want to see it?""
"They could improve the support. Sometimes, you make a service request and don't get an answer. Then, sometimes, we don't get a response that we want, and it's frustrating."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Identity Management (IM) with 190 reviews while One Identity Manager is ranked 3rd in Identity Management (IM) with 74 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while One Identity Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of One Identity Manager writes "The JML is customizable but the support team isn't strong". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey and Cisco Duo, whereas One Identity Manager is most compared with SailPoint IdentityIQ, Oracle Identity Governance, EVOLVEUM midPoint, Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and Saviynt. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. One Identity Manager report.
See our list of best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all Identity Management (IM) 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.
