No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Microsoft Entra ID vs RSA Adaptive Authentication comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 11, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Entra ID
Ranking in Authentication Systems
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
277
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (2nd), Identity Management (IM) (2nd), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (1st), Access Management (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (2nd)
RSA Adaptive Authentication
Ranking in Authentication Systems
26th
Average Rating
6.8
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra ID is 5.8%, down from 14.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of RSA Adaptive Authentication is 1.4%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Entra ID5.8%
RSA Adaptive Authentication1.4%
Other92.8%
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

Stafin Jacob - PeerSpot reviewer
Microsoft 365 Security & Compliance Practice Lead at Invoke
Identity has become our central gatekeeper and has provided secure single sign-on for all users
Microsoft Entra ID can improve by focusing more on new passwordless methods and becoming a primary adopter. One feature we would like to see is the ability to have security questions for password resets. I know the current capability is phasing out, so we do not have an alternative method yet. Customers who already use security questions require a smoother transition for that capability to be available. My experience with the deployment has had some challenges, particularly around the Microsoft MFA campaigns. The hardest part is moving users from a different MFA provider to the Microsoft MFA provider, as it ultimately depends on user activity. In large enterprises with numerous users across various geographies, this transition takes time. If there are ways to exert more control around that process, it would improve the situation.
Directorc4e7 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Cyber Security at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We need better ease of use; the product is overly complicated
There are many use cases that we have defined based on our business needs Ingestion of logs and raising alert space on those logs are the most valuable features. The product is basically unusable. We need better ease of use; it's overly complicated. It has taken years to implement. We used RSA…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"After implementing Conditional Access policies in Microsoft Entra ID, we observed significant improvements in our security metrics, with unauthorized access attempts reduced by approximately 60 to 80% due to strict policy enforcement, MFA adoption rate increasing to nearly 100% for critical applications, and the ability to automatically block or challenge a higher number of risky sign-ins detected by the system while also seeing a significant decrease in security incidents related to identity compromise after implementation."
"We have a complex scenario with several applications, and we're trying to achieve SSO for most of our applications, but some of our legacy applications don't support SSO or modern protocols. Our core applications are ready for SSO or to be federated. We've centralized our authentication process using Entra ID, so we can collect sign-offs from the users and filter using conditional access."
"With Azure Conditional Access you can specify network locations where you want some of the services in the organization to be available to users, and where you don't want users to have access."
"Overall, we are satisfied with the solution and the features provided."
"Many of its features are valuable, including: facilitating application authentication, privileged access management, processes for attestation, and access reviews."
"The performance is good."
"The scalability capabilities are quite high."
"The most valuable feature for me is enterprise applications. This functionality allows the building of applications that are tied into APIs that we can grant specific permissions and limit the scope of access."
"Once we started adopting these products, we've seen the fraud losses go down considerably."
"Ingestion of logs and raising alert space on those logs are the most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature is the stock tokens. That works the best for us."
"Our customer are seeing value from the product, as they experience cost reductions. They can stop fraud from their customers, then their customers can have a better experience from their services."
"Risk Engine’s risk score, eFN, GeoIP, and device binding all coming together in the Policy Rules to decide when to escalate to MFA."
"The capability to manage your business policy related to security when required without vendor involvement."
"One of the most valuable features is the fraud detection capability with minimal friction in the customer experience."
"It has reduced false positives greatly in our fraud detection ability."
 

Cons

"When you fix the rules and permissions, working directly on the manifest, you really need to have in-depth knowledge. If there were a graphical user interface to update the manifest, that would be good."
"Microsoft should work on enhancing its machine-learning algorithm to prevent unnecessary lockouts of users."
"My experience with the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Entra ID indicates that we need to make it simple. It's way too complicated."
"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."
"Most of the features come with a P1 or P2 license. With the free version, you do not get much."
"Sometimes I sense complications when moving from one tenant to another, which is simply because different enterprises have different security guidelines."
"The technical support has its downsides and upsides. While they are fast, it can take time to get the right person because there are many steps to reach the appropriate team member at Microsoft support, which can be somewhat annoying."
"The licensing and support are expensive and have room for improvement."
"The product is basically unusable. We need better ease of use; it's overly complicated."
"Better filters when searching for events. The current features for current filters when searching fraud events are not very comprehensive. You can only filter by certain fields in the transaction."
"RSA Adaptive Authentication lacks a mechanism to verify the identity of a new user in the Enrollment event workflow."
"It has taken years to implement."
"I think I would like to see them use more of our data, and give us more ability to control or configure how the protection patterns work for a specific business, and also provide more transparency into the methodology."
"I would like to see a more adaptive type of solution, something that we could use on our web pages..."
"Reporting modules is one of the major areas that can be improved further."
"It's an okay solution. It's just old technology and it's time to move on."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the solution was reasonable."
"Its price is okay. It is easy to go from P1 to P2 license. It is not exactly a bargain, but I would recommend the P2 license."
"Entra ID is not too bad, but Microsoft licensing generally is insane. Most customers normally buy a bundle license with Microsoft 365, E3, or E5. Out of our 2,000 customers, for 99.9% of our customers, the Entra ID license that they are getting through the part of that would be sufficient. There are some more advanced ones that give you a bit more functionality, but we probably have not had a customer for that. We do not even internally use that ourselves. When you buy the Entra ID license on its own, it is probably three or four pounds. You just get it included in the license."
"Pricing could always be better. You pay the premium for Microsoft. Sometimes, it is worth it, and at other times, you wish to have more licensing options, especially for smaller companies."
"Pricing-wise, they offer a stepladder approach. You can start with the lowest level features, then start increasing based on new requirements."
"I would advise implementing the solution to VIPs and admins; it's affordable, effective, and efficient. I would say training staff on properly using the tool is also essential."
"For a small business buying individual licenses, it is an affordable solution."
"I'm not totally aware of the pricing and licensing, but I do know that the pricing and licensing must be quite balanced. We are a pretty old client of Microsoft, and MSA is just one of the services we use from Microsoft. There's a whole Microsoft 365 suite that's implemented as well. I'm sure it is something that is acceptable to both parties."
"The pricing is $50 per head, yearly."
"Keep the proxy service layer on premises. That consumes SaaS security services on the back-end."
"Customers need to deploy the solution in a very expensive infrastructure. RSA should should think about a less expensive infrastructure for customers because the solution costs around $100,000, and the infrastructure needed to support that solution may be even more expensive than that price."
"You may need to opt for second best if funding is low and the number of users is huge. However, the pricing is able to be negotiated if your user figures are huge."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
7%
Financial Services Firm
27%
Construction Company
18%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business89
Midsize Enterprise42
Large Enterprise162
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

How does Duo Security compare with Microsoft Authenticator?
We switched to Duo Security for identity verification. We’d been using a competitor but got the chance to evaluate Duo for 30 days, and we could not be happier. Duo Security is easy to configure a...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Active Directory?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that going through and being able to use these things is always part of delivering an M365 bundle, so I don't think the experience is great ...
What needs improvement with Azure Active Directory?
Microsoft Entra ID can be improved by open-sourcing it. You already have Windows Subsystem for Linux, which is open-source Linux in Microsoft. One major shift for Microsoft would be using the commo...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Also Known As

Azure AD, Azure Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, Microsoft Authenticator
No data available
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft Entre ID is trusted by companies of all sizes and industries including Walmart, Zscaler, Uniper, Amtrak, monday.com, and more.
ADP, Ameritas, Partners Healthcare
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Entra ID vs. RSA Adaptive Authentication and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
908,858 professionals have used our research since 2012.