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

Microsoft Entra ID vs Thales SafeNet Trusted Access 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 Single Sign-On (SSO)
2nd
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
1st
Ranking in Access Management
1st
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
276
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (1st), Identity Management (IM) (3rd), Microsoft Security Suite (2nd)
Thales SafeNet Trusted Access
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
19th
Ranking in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS)
25th
Ranking in Access Management
27th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra ID is 9.1%, down from 25.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thales SafeNet Trusted Access is 2.0%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft Entra ID9.1%
Thales SafeNet Trusted Access2.0%
Other88.9%
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

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.
GauravMathur - PeerSpot reviewer
Vice President Information Technology at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Simple to use, easy to set up, and performs well
I'm not saying that we want to switch the product, however, since the requirement has increased, we are looking at other options that may be better suited. The scalability may not there. We have a few specific use cases where we have to avoid the cloud. Especially in Europe, we're not allowed to carry their phone in factories. We need some sort of secure access solution. There's a dependency on Microsoft Azure. I am paying to SafeNet and in parallel, I also need to pay Microsoft to use the same service. That makes no sense, to pay double. If they could do something about it, that would be very good.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Microsoft Entra ID's valuable features include integration capabilities, a simplified Active Directory approach, scalability, conditional access, and privileged identity management."
"Configuring the domain and setting it up in the Azure portal is just three clicks to be honest."
"It's user-friendly and easy to understand."
"Multi-factor authentication (MFA) has improved our customers' security posture. Multi-factor authentication has two layers of authentication, which helps in case you input your credentials into a phishing website and then it has access to your credentials. So if they use your credentials, then you have proof on your phone that was sent to the end user."
"Many of its features are valuable, including: facilitating application authentication, privileged access management, processes for attestation, and access reviews."
"The product is easy to use."
"I would rate the solution as 9. It is a very good solution for unified management."
"I like that you can run it on-premises. I also like that I can use Azure at any time as the main one."
"The interface is easy to use."
"I recommend this solution because it protects information."
"The validation and integrity features of the endpoint are great."
"Right now, we only have a small use case for the product, however, it has performed well."
"The solution is simple to use."
 

Cons

"Rule management and permissions need improvements. I have had discussions with product managers about these challenges and sent emails regarding them. Additionally, improvements are needed in the Identity Governance and Administration (IGA) side of things."
"Azure Active Directory could improve by having an authentication service for laptops or desktop computers running Mac and Linux operating systems. They currently have authentication capabilities for Microsoft Windows. Having this capability would benefit people because in today's world everybody is working from the home environment."
"I would like to be able to authenticate Wi-Fi users using the Azure ID"
"I want to see new functionalities for the active directory."
"Anytime that we have tried to allow Microsoft Entra ID to authenticate our users to come back on-premises, we have run into some issues, usually with latency or delay."
"The frequent changes in branding cause confusion among customers who struggle to keep track of product names and functions."
"Microsoft Entra ID could benefit from more fine-tuned rights. It is necessary to prevent granting an application or user broad access rights."
"There are issues using it with ADFS."
"There's a dependency on Microsoft Azure."
"SafeNet's reporting and monitoring features could be improved."
"The scalability may not be there."
"I'd like to see more networking features, such as the ability to integrate network monitoring solutions and authenticate the app users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We are working with the Premium P2 licenses, which are reasonable. If you invest in the on-premises environment setup, then it costs so much. However, on-prem AD gives you the ability to manage your organization in a very organized manner, where you can create a group policy."
"Licensing fees are paid monthly."
"It is not too expensive."
"The pricing is good; it's not cheap but very reasonable."
"We are a non-profit organization, so we get good prices from Microsoft for their products. It is working well, but it could be cheaper. For the type of organization we are, it would be good if they could give a little bit more and be more generous like Google, which has completely free services. Microsoft has free versions or web services called Office 365 E1, which is free for use, but we want to have it with more qualified clients."
"I'd recommend Azure Active Directory if you are a big company. For small or medium companies, it's probably not the best idea in the world because of the pricing. If you are a small company, you can probably deploy your own solutions because you're not handling a website with tons of traffic. If you are not like Adidas, Nike, or Walmart, you can do it in a way that is more localized than handling everything through a big price solution. However, Azure tends to provide you with solutions that are easier to use. If it was cheaper, I'd definitely recommend going for it."
"This product is sold as part of the enterprise package and our licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"There are add-on components and services, such as identity services, that we have to add to our Azure subscription. Only then can I actually say it's on par with the on-prem server edition. Why should I pay for a component? It should be included in my subscription."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
903,182 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
12%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Construction Company
11%
Performing Arts
10%
Legal Firm
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business90
Midsize Enterprise40
Large Enterprise161
No data available
 

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
SafeNet Trusted Access, Gemalto SafeNet Trusted Access
 

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.
IBM, Western Union, Vanderbilt University Medical Centre, Novartis, and AT&T.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Entra ID vs. Thales SafeNet Trusted Access and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.
903,182 professionals have used our research since 2012.