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 January 2026, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra ID is 8.2%, down from 16.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Thales Authenticators is 2.3%, up from 2.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Entra ID8.2%
Thales Authenticators2.3%
Other89.5%
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

"The security and infrastructure management features are the most valuable ones for us."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to establish resource groups and set permissions through RBAC across these groups."
"I love how it uniquely identifies a person universally. If you have the email address, it will be the same account across most platforms. If everything is set up correctly, it's easy to identify a person and get all kinds of information about them from Azure or whichever system."
"The implementation of Microsoft Entra ID has definitely made app access easier and more seamless for working with Azure registered apps by allowing them to be integrated within the system and setting up SSOs and secure authentication through Entra."
"Microsoft Entra ID makes work easier; compared to competitors, it is easier to use, easier to navigate, and more customizable, which makes it a better choice."
"Entra ID has helped us implement role-based authentication rather than conditional keys."
"The most valuable feature is the factor identification. I find that it is natural integration, and it is just a natural step. I do not need to do anything else."
"Technical support has been great."
"Scalable and stable."
"The technical support services are good."
"I like how the solution allows me to support different types of hardware tokens and integrate with OTP."
"The most valuable feature of SafeNet Authentication Manager is authentication."
"We use this solution to log into virtual machines like VMware and VMware Horizon."
 

Cons

"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."
"The solution was difficult to scale because the group's configuration was complex. I would rate the scalability level of Azure Active Directory a five out of ten."
"Four years ago, we had an issue with Azure AD. We wanted to reverse sync from Azure AD to on-prem Active Directory, but we couldn't achieve this. Azure AD could connect only in one way, for example, from your site to Azure. If you needed to do the reverse and connect from Azure to on-prem, there was no way to achieve it. We asked Microsoft, and they told us that they don't support it."
"Azure AD provides two types of features. One is Azure AD Excel and is already B2C. Out of both versions, Azure B2C requires some improvement, in terms of user management and role management, et cetera."
"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."
"There should be guidance on features, especially security features, in Entra ID and whether they are sufficient on their own. The solution could become expensive when paying extra for enhanced security features, so Microsoft needs to offer better clarity on this matter."
"I would like to see a better delegation of access. For instance, we want to allow different groups within the company to manage different elements of Azure AD, but I need more granularity in delegating access."
"Rule management and permissions need improvements."
"The product could be improved by adding more features for sending tokens via SMS or phone calls."
"Lacks integration with other platforms."
"The stability could improve."
"The problem with SafeNet is that it's not integrated with Microsoft 365."
"The solution should allow for support of multi-tenant architecture."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I am not involved in the pricing or licensing, so I can't speak to that."
"It is costly."
"MFA and P2 licenses for two Azures for fully-enabled scenarios and features cost a lot of money. This is where Okta is trying to get the prices down."
"Licensing fees are paid monthly."
"The price is affordable, and we pay around $100 per month."
"We make sure that we only enable the licenses that are needed for the users, rather than enabling licenses in a blanket fashion."
"The subscription should be categorized by business size. For example, small companies should have a discounted price, this would help small companies and the organization to be automated."
"It is bundled with other services and the pricing is quite reasonable."
"Thales is more expensive than its competitors."
"There is an annual licensing fee."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
11%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Performing Arts
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: December 2025.
881,114 professionals have used our research since 2012.