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

Microsoft Entra ID vs Venafi 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
7.1
Number of Reviews
219
Ranking in other categories
Single Sign-On (SSO) (1st), Identity Management (IM) (1st), Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) (1st), Access Management (1st), Microsoft Security Suite (2nd)
Venafi
Ranking in Authentication Systems
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2025, in the Authentication Systems category, the mindshare of Microsoft Entra ID is 16.2%, down from 22.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Venafi is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Authentication Systems
 

Featured Reviews

Aaron Liang - PeerSpot reviewer
Has significantly improved secure access to applications and resources in our environment
Microsoft Entra ID has helped by simplifying our management of permissions for APIs. We are not directly exposing credentials, as we use tokens instead. It has made management easier and more secure, especially in a multi-user environment. The implementation of Microsoft Entra ID significantly improved secure access to applications and resources in our environment, primarily through the widespread use of single-sign-on. Managing API permissions became much easier, as application registration often involves calling an API to utilize services without directly exposing credentials, relying instead on token-based authentication. This streamlined approach benefits end-users by simplifying access while remaining transparent to them. Ultimately, my role focuses on ensuring a smooth and user-friendly experience, even if the underlying technology remains unseen by the end-users. Our company strongly emphasizes passwordless authentication, primarily through device-bound passkeys in Microsoft Authenticator. While administrators with high-privileged accounts utilize YubiKeys and passwords for tasks like accessing Microsoft Graph, we are actively transitioning all other users towards passwordless methods such as Windows Hello biometrics. This approach streamlines authentication and enhances security. Though initial deployment in 2022 presented challenges due to hardware limitations and the lingering effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, the technology has significantly improved and provides a simple and effective user experience.
Adam Goldstein - PeerSpot reviewer
Automates certificate management across platforms and has enhanced integration support
Venafi's automation capabilities were significant, as they allowed us to automate certificate rotation and deployment effectively. We integrated it with GlobalSign and aimed to automate DNS verification, although challenges remained. Venafi's platform-agnostic nature was beneficial for handling certificates across different systems like IIS, AWS, and Azure. It ensures centralized certificate management, which is crucial for compliance and maintaining best practices. It significantly improved our operational efficiency by automating certificate workflows. This reduced the number of certificates requiring manual management, freeing internal resources from deploying trivial certificates. While some complex certificates still needed manual intervention, automating simpler ones eliminated internal bottlenecks associated with tasks like uploading certificates to Imperva. By automating these processes, we reduced errors, streamlined workflows, and eliminated the need to repeatedly remember and execute complex procedures, ultimately increasing our overall operational efficiency. The automation capabilities are good; when properly configured, it performs as expected.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"When logging on to Azure AD it's pretty quick."
"The identity and access management piece is probably the most valuable to us."
"Federated identity management is a great feature for the zero-trust model."
"The solution is free to use and you can use it for every service."
"We do not have to deploy lots of machines all over the place to run things as a service, which is how we like to deploy things, just as a service."
"It has made our work easier in that it’s simplified everything for us."
"Microsoft Azure AD is easy to install and is a stable solution."
"It's very good at not disrupting the user experience."
"The most valuable feature of Venafi is the automation that helps save time and reduce human error."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is their certificate discovery."
"We use Venafi for PKI certificates."
"Venafi is super stable, and we experienced no issues with its stability."
"Venafi's technical support is impressively fast."
"The most important feature for us is the ease of use. If something is not available, we can develop our own scripts for it. We can create change management around this tool."
"Automating anything, whether on-prem or cloud, is possible."
"We have reduced 80% to 90% of our outages with Venafi, which impacts the revenue substantially."
 

Cons

"The permission management is a mess."
"The Cloud Provisioning Agent cannot provision a lot of the information that AD Connect does. For starters, the lightweight version cannot synchronize device information. If you have computers on-premises, the information about them will not be synchronized by the Cloud Provisioning Agent. In addition, if you have a user on the cloud and he changes his password, that information should be written back to the on-premises instance. But that workflow cannot be done with the lightweight agent. It can only be done with the more robust version."
"When it comes to Azure, creating certain things or getting different resources isn't very clear. You need a certain level of knowledge of the system. It could be a little bit more friendly so that some of the things can be done easily, but after everything is created, it's easy to use."
"The pricing is okay, however, it could always be better in the future."
"Microsoft needs to add a single setup, so whenever resources join the company or are leaving the company, all of the changes can be made with a single click."
"Our users sometimes experience issues from having multiple Microsoft accounts, which can cause some confusion and hassle."
"I would like to be able to authenticate Wi-Fi users using the Azure ID"
"Initially, we wanted to exclude specific users from MSA. So, we had a condition policy, which forces MSA for all the users. So we wanted to exclude users who are using an NPS extension. So it was not listed, as a NPS extension was not listed outside an application, in actual, so, we go back and were not able to exclude users using NPS extension from MSA. So that was one limitation that we found and we had to work around that."
"Venafi excels in automating certificate rotation and deployment but could enhance its offering by improving support for hardware security modules like Fortanix and providing more advanced, out-of-the-box integrations with public certificate authorities for DNS re-verification."
"Venafi's overall installation could be made easier."
"Currently lacks the capability to automatically download certificates in JKS."
"Venafi excels in automating certificate rotation and deployment but could enhance its offering by improving support for hardware security modules like Fortanix and providing more advanced, out-of-the-box integrations with public certificate authorities for DNS re-verification."
"The product was really good when it was a Venafi product. However, since its acquisition by CyberArk, there has been a lack of significant innovations. They are pushing for cloud adoption, but we prefer on-premises solutions due to regulatory concerns."
"The product was really good when it was a Venafi product. However, since its acquisition by CyberArk, there has been a lack of significant innovations."
"Venafi could enhance its offerings by providing more automation features."
"Currently, specific processes require manual installations due to the lack of built-in integrations."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing model makes it difficult to understand the real cost of the solution, especially because it changes all the time."
"The price is good, and we have no complaints."
"We are currently on the education plan, so the price is slightly better than the development plan."
"From a pricing standpoint, with all the services that we get, we are okay. I do not see a problem with the pricing structure. We are getting our money's worth."
"We pay a yearly license. Licenses are very expensive."
"Compared to other Microsoft products, the cost is not too expensive. There's a free tier available, though it doesn't include all features. Overall, it's well-priced."
"The licensing model is straightforward. I don't think there are any issues with the E3 license or E5 license."
"It is very expensive. Its price should be lower. Price is the most important factor for Turkish people."
"Venafi's pricing appears to be competitive within the market."
"The pricing model is complex, considering factors beyond the number of certificates. This complexity can make our payments to Venafi challenging if costs continue to rise. It is good but more expensive than the competitors."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Authentication Systems solutions are best for your needs.
845,485 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Educational Organization
33%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

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 do you like most about Azure Active Directory?
It is very simple. The Active Directory functions are very easy for us. Its integration with anything is very easy. We can easily do third-party multifactor authentication.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Active Directory?
Microsoft Entra ID is reportedly quite expensive for each user regarding security features. The renewal cost is particularly high according to the teams managing purchases.
What do you like most about Venafi?
We use Venafi for PKI certificates.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Venafi?
Venafi's pricing appears to be competitive within the market. After evaluating other vendors, we found that Venafi offers good value for the cost, and we are satisfied with their pricing structure.
What needs improvement with Venafi?
Venafi excels in automating certificate rotation and deployment but could enhance its offering by improving support for hardware security modules like Fortanix and providing more advanced, out-of-t...
 

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.
Surescripts, CME Group, TD Bank Group, Aetna, MoneyGram, Zions Bancorp, Cisco
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Entra ID vs. Venafi and other solutions. Updated: March 2025.
845,485 professionals have used our research since 2012.