Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Microsoft Entra ID vs Thales Authenticators 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
266
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (1st), Identity Management (IM) (2nd), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (1st), Access Management (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (2nd)
Thales Authenticators
Ranking in Authentication Systems
11th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra ID is 7.8%, down from 16.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thales Authenticators is 2.4%, up from 2.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Entra ID7.8%
Thales Authenticators2.4%
Other89.8%
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

JP
Senior Information Security Engineer at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Implementing seamless integration boosts secure access and supports Zero Trust
What I appreciate the most about Microsoft Entra ID is that it integrates seamlessly with all the Defender products and is easy to use. Microsoft Entra ID's integration capabilities influence our Zero Trust model by allowing us to enforce our Zero Trust model. Conditional access policies allow us to leverage Microsoft Entra ID to verify that devices signing in to our cloud services are coming from registered devices, and that people are passing all the other requirements we have in order to complete sign-on or conditional access policies. Since implementing Microsoft Entra ID, I've observed changes in the frequency and nature of identity-related security incidents. The organization already had it implemented when I arrived, and I've been working to enhance it. Better configuration of Microsoft Entra ID has allowed us to better protect our organization from threats. Having it alone isn't a solution, but ensuring proper configuration goes a long way in preventing future compromises. My company's approach to defending against token theft and nation-state attacks has evolved since implementing Microsoft Entra ID. We haven't experienced any known compromises from nation-state attacks, and implementing newer features gives me more confidence in our protection. Regarding device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator and our approach to phishing-resistant authentication, we are currently implementing Microsoft Entra ID certificate-based authentication. Adding a strong form of MFA is important as we found it to be the most cost-effective way. While other solutions might be equally or more secure, they are significantly more expensive. Having worked as an IT consultant mainly with the Microsoft stack across various industries, I have experience with different identity management solutions. Microsoft Entra ID remains the best option. The major advantages when comparing it to Okta include integration with Defender products, Defender for Identities' integration with conditional access policies, and insider threat management integration for blocking sign-ins based on risk factors. The enhancement of Microsoft Entra ID's implementation is relatively straightforward. My main concern is the occasional lack of documentation and the frequency of changes, which can make feature location challenging.
Gustavo Merighi - PeerSpot reviewer
Automation and Telecommunications Analyst at Grupo Energisa
Has an easy-to-use management interface and a straightforward initial setup process
Our primary use cases include multifactor authentication for VPN connections and access to security tools like jump servers and firewalls. We also use it to enhance security measures in an enterprise environment The most valuable feature is the YAML 2.0 integration. It has an easy-to-use…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Conditional Access is a helpful feature because it allows us to provide better security for our users."
"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."
"What I find most valuable about Microsoft Entra ID is centralizing identity; I don't need to worry too much about how to set up the groups, I just need to get access and assign it to the correct place, centralizing everything and making it more transparent for me while leveraging these groups and users in my applications represents the best difference."
"It's very user-friendly for users."
"As an end-user, the access to shared resources that I get from using this product is very helpful."
"Don't delay implementing this solution, it's the best thing you can do for your identity protection."
"Microsoft Entra ID identity platform is feature-rich, allowing for a lot of integration as a single identity model."
"Microsoft customer service is the best in the industry."
"Scalable and stable."
"The most valuable feature of SafeNet Authentication Manager is authentication."
"I like how the solution allows me to support different types of hardware tokens and integrate with OTP."
"The technical support services are good."
"We use this solution to log into virtual machines like VMware and VMware Horizon."
 

Cons

"The licensing and support are expensive and have room for improvement."
"The variety of different group types has caused challenges in areas where we have Microsoft 365 groups, distribution groups, and security groups, and the different types do not always make programmatic management clear."
"Something that I definitely expect is improvement in the UI and UX for frontline workers, especially for non-tech savvy individuals."
"Azure AD needs to be more in sync. The synchronization can be time-consuming."
"I think there is room for improvement with actually discussing, and advertising Microsoft as a an authenticator. Many people just get confused and use Google, and I think if Microsoft would make more of an effort to penetrate the market, that would be key."
"The onboarding process for new users can be improved. It can be made simpler for people who have never registered to Azure AD previously and need to create an account and enable the MFA. The initial setup can be made simpler for non-IT people. It should be a bit simpler to use. Unless you get certifications, such as AZ-300 and AZ-301, it is not a simple thing to use at the enterprise scale."
"Customers should be informed that public review features are not intended for production use."
"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."
"The product could be improved by adding more features for sending tokens via SMS or phone calls."
"Lacks integration with other platforms."
"The solution should allow for support of multi-tenant architecture."
"The problem with SafeNet is that it's not integrated with Microsoft 365."
"The stability could improve."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Microsoft Azure AD has P1 or P2 licensing options, and it depends on the customer's needs. To use Conditional Access, you need to have the P1 license, and to use the PIN features, you need the P2 license."
"The solution costs us 60,000 Rupees annually, just over $700, and there are no additional costs."
"If you're on Azure, it can be free or it's incorporated, at no extra cost, or it can become extremely complicated."
"The price of Azure Active Directory and Amazon AWS, are almost the same, but most people prefer Amazon AWS because they find it's a little cheaper to some extent and an easier platform to use."
"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."
"The pricing is good; it's not cheap but very reasonable."
"Everything needs to be considered for the requirements and if it is within the budget, then you can come up with a solution, whether it is SaaS, PaaS, or IaaS."
"It is a really nice tool and we have a license for the more complex model."
"There is an annual licensing fee."
"Thales is more expensive than its competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
9%
Performing Arts
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business85
Midsize Enterprise38
Large Enterprise155
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 the pricing, setup costs, and licensing of Microsoft Entra ID is that it is decent.
What needs improvement with Azure Active Directory?
I think Microsoft Entra ID could be improved by assigning permissions to nested groups in the next release.
What needs improvement with Thales Authenticators?
Currently, the solution fulfills our requirements. We are very satisfied with its features, and do not have any specific ideas for improvement right now. Perhaps, in the future, three-factor authen...
What is your primary use case for Thales Authenticators?
Our employees, whether working on-site or remotely, use Thales Authenticators for two-factor authentication to log in to their laptops or PCs. This is our primary use case.
What advice do you have for others considering Thales Authenticators?
From our past years of experience, the solution is very smooth, and we have had a good experience with it. We would definitely recommend Thales to others for its reliability and features. I'd rate ...
 

Also Known As

Azure AD, Azure Active Directory, Azure Active Directory, Microsoft Authenticator
Gemalto Ezio, Ezio, Gemalto Authenticators, SafeNet Authentication Manager
 

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.
Standard Chartered Bank (SCB)
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Entra ID vs. Thales Authenticators and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
881,455 professionals have used our research since 2012.