We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and Oracle Access Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Access Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is cloud based so it is always updated,"
"Multi-factor authentication really secures our environments and gives us the flexibility to use location-based policies. Azure AD also gives us a lot of flexibility in our scope of integration."
"We can have an audit and we can easily audit logs."
"The solution has come a long way. Now, with the Azure AD B2C offering integrated as well, we've got a full IAM-type solution for our customer-facing identity management. In addition, when it comes to user journeys we now can hook in custom flows for different credential checking and authorizations for specific conditional access."
"The initial setup was very straightforward."
"Azure Active Directory has many automation capabilities, and you can apply policies on top. You can do a lot of things with these combinations and integrate other tools like PingFederate."
"The security features, multi-factor authentication, and service management features are valuable."
"Let's say we decide that our users need to have MFA, multi-factor authentication. It is very easy to implement that with Azure Active Directory."
"My company has used most features of Oracle Access Manager for various implementations, but the most helpful feature of the solution for the business and customers is single sign-on."
"The MFA is the most valuable aspect."
"The scalability of the solution is good. We haven't felt we've been restricted from expanding as necessary and we haven't heard of any issues from our clients."
"The product supports customization."
"Excellent SSO solution for Oracle products."
"I would tell others that this solution is reliable. If they are looking for a solution that is reliable and that is scalable, then this is a good one."
"In general, the customization that is offered is very good. The company that I am working with currently is using this feature quite extensively."
"Once it is set up, it is easy to use and it integrates with most of the products on the market."
"At first, it was a bit challenging to come up with a workaround that would get authentication to work."
"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."
"In terms of stability, sometimes the more applications you integrate, the more it becomes a little bit unstable."
"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."
"I want to be able to identify the audiences effectively and manage them."
"The solution could be cheaper."
"For example, there were some authentication features that, for security purposes, had certain limitations. Those limitations still exist, but the portal now has options so that the customers can make custom features to manage their identity."
"We previously used Microsoft's technical support, which was excellent; they were very responsive. Now, we use a CSP, and their support is lacking, so I rate them five out of ten."
"The mobile access to the solution isn't ideal. They should work to improve its functionality."
"The solution's lifecycle management is troublesome. Also, another area of issue in the solution is the part involving documentation of certain features."
"There are problems with stability."
"Multi-factor authentication requires a lot of processes and technicalities."
"There could be some improvements in the documentation and overall knowledge base of the solution."
"The initial implementation can definitely be improved because you have to work on several components to configure it correctly."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the interface."
"The technical support is not very good at all."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Access Management with 190 reviews while Oracle Access Manager is ranked 11th in Access Management with 15 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while Oracle Access Manager is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID writes "Saves us time and money and features Conditional Access policies, SSPR, and MFA". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Access Manager writes "A convenient solution that supports customization and provides many features in a single suite". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Okta Workforce Identity, whereas Oracle Access Manager is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, Ping Identity Platform, Auth0 and F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM). See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. Oracle Access Manager report.
See our list of best Access Management vendors.
We monitor all Access Management 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.