We performed a comparison between Azure Active Directory and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, users favor Azure Active Directory over Fortinet FortiAuthenticator because it has a free option and users also report an ROI.
"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."
"The thing that I find most valuable is that Omada consists of building blocks, which means that you can configure almost anything you want without using custom code, making it pretty easy to do. It's possible to connect to multiple target systems and to create one role that consists of different permissions in the different target systems. So one role in Omada can make sure that you have an account in three different systems."
"The Governance and self-service that can be set up so you can use them yourself to work in the system are the most valuable features. End users can be enabled to help themselves."
"Omada offers a technical solution that addresses both our needs."
"I appreciate all the support we receive from Omada."
"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."
"We are able to onboard new user accounts much faster by automating the process and standardizing our operations globally. Previously, there were many individual processes and manual admin interactions. We also see a lot of cost savings and benefits because through automation and standardization."
"The most valuable feature in Omada is the governance. We work with other products and other product vendors, but the sweet spot in the market for Omada is where things are heavy on governance."
"I appreciate its ability to provide multi-factor authentication, but it's primarily focused on this function."
"The product is good, cost-effective, and functionally efficient."
"The product is stable and reliable."
"The ease of use is really nice. Using Authenticator, I've been able to actually work better on my authentication due to the fact that I have a single fabric to authenticate control from my firewall and on my access points. Authentication takes place from this area."
"We have not had issues with Fortinet FortiAuthenticator. It is stable."
"Enables easy integration, allowing for 2FA with our VPN."
"The most valuable features are the performance and ease of use."
"The two-step authentication provides a higher level of security."
"The most valuable features of this solution are definitely the authorization and authentication, and the rule-based user validation."
"In terms of identity management, it helps to improve security posture. It generally helps in terms cloud security, simplicity, and single sign-on for multiple apps."
"It's a very intuitive platform. It's easy to create groups and add people."
"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."
"If you want to replicate a website at the frontend in Azure, it's very easy to do it globally."
"The boards for task tracking are a valuable feature."
"Active Directory itself is the best feature it has. It also gives us a single pane of glass for managing user access."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to deploy and make changes to every workstation that I need to. We use it to control policy and I can apply the right policies to all our 1,500 workstations, notebooks, et cetera."
"Omada Identity has two main issues that need to be solved or improved the most. One is its setup or installation process because it's complex and cumbersome. I'm talking about the process for on-premises deployment because I've never tried the cloud version of Omada Identity. Setting up the cloud version should be much easier. The second area for improvement in Omada Identity is that it's piggybacking on Microsoft's complex way of having all kinds of add-ons, extensions, or setups, whether small or large, such as the new SQL Server, and it's cumbersome to make sure that everything works. Omada Identity is a complex solution and could still be improved."
"In our organization, all the data is event-driven, which means that if an attribute is changed in the source system, it can be updated within a few seconds in all end-user systems. There is room for improvement in Omada regarding that. Omada is still batch-based for some processes, so sometimes it can take an hour or even four hours before the execution is run and the update is sent."
"The security permission inside Omada needs improvement. It's tricky to set up."
"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."
"Functionality and usability could be improved."
"I would like to see them expand the functionality of the tool to continue to be competitive with the monsters out there. For example, they could add functionality on the authentication side, functionality that Octa and SailPoint have. But they should do that while maintaining the same simplicity that makes Omada a product of choice today."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in Omada's integration capabilities, particularly in streamlining complex integrations and enhancing programming logic for better rule management."
"The hardware aspect of the solution could be improved. We are not really able to understand the hardware capabilities of the device."
"The technical support team is bad."
"I would like to see integration and customization capabilities with the end-user portal to solve authentication issues with diverse implementation scenarios."
"Fortinet FortiAuthenticator's initial setup process could be easier."
"There are some protocols, such as SHA and SHA-2, that are not supported."
"If you want some other FortiAuthenticator from one site to another site, you should have requirements, but really if you have authentication and directory or another solution, you should change the password of the authenticator between the solution and the directory and other things. So transfer of data and other information should be simpler."
"The GUI has some shortcomings and can be made better. The GUI is not great."
"I would like to see more security features in reference to identity login or identity identification."
"I faced difficulties from Micorosft's end and during the transition from Microsoft Active Directory to Microsoft Entra ID. Sometimes, some of Microsoft's documentation could be a little outdated."
"The SSO MyApps interface is very basic and needs better customization capabilities."
"The Azure AD Application Proxy, which helps you publish applications in a secure way, has room for improvement. We are moving from another solution into the Application Proxy and it's quite detailed. Depending on the role you're signing in as, you can end up at different websites, which wasn't an issue with our old solution."
"I want to see more features to improve security, such as integrated user behavior analysis."
"The product needs to be more user-friendly."
"I would like to dive into some of the things that we saw today around the workflows at this Microsoft event. I cannot say that they need to make it better because I do not have much experience with it, but something that is always applicable to Microsoft is that they need to be able to integrate with their competitors. If you look at IDP, they do not integrate with Okta."
"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."
"They can improve how people manage their accounts. They can simplify and provide more information about adding or updating a phone number or email id in the MSA account. A lot of time users do get confused about where to go. For example, if I've changed my mobile number, where do I go and change my mobile number in the MSA account? A lot of time, employees think if they change the phone number in the HR database, it'll automatically get changed on the MSA account, which is not the case. Microsoft can simplify that and add these questions in the FAQ documents as well."
Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is ranked 6th in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 52 reviews while Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Single Sign-On (SSO) with 190 reviews. Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiAuthenticator writes "A reasonably priced solution that can be scaled toward different functionalities and offers flexible SMS messaging". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". Fortinet FortiAuthenticator is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Fortinet FortiNAC, Fortinet FortiToken, Cisco Duo and CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, whereas Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Saviynt. See our Fortinet FortiAuthenticator vs. Microsoft Entra ID report.
See our list of best Single Sign-On (SSO) vendors, best Authentication Systems vendors, and best Identity Management (IM) vendors.
We monitor all Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.
