We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID Governance and SailPoint IdentityIQ based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Access reviews are an essential feature of Entra Governance. Additionally, privileged identity management is one of its most valuable features. Just-in-time access, or Jet GIT, is integral to this system. Moreover, user behavior analytics stands out as one of its top features."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Entra ID Governance for identity management is multi-factor authentication."
"The product's most valuable features are the robust audit trail capabilities."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Entra ID Governance is access reviews."
"SailPoint IdentityIQ has a good and straightforward user interface. They also have a lot of resources and documentation available to understand the process."
"SailPoint has allowed us to ensure the right people have the right access and to the rights things."
"The most selling modules for SailPoint are the compliance manager and the life cycle manager."
"Provides good authorization and authentication system functionality."
"Access certification and provisioning are two of the solutions most valuable features."
"Provides functionalities for various stages, such as joiner, mover, and leaver"
"The most valuable feature for our customers and for us is the identity data warehouse."
"I like IdentityIQ's granular attachment management and certification customization features."
"The platform's configuration process needs improvement."
"One area for improvement in Microsoft Entra ID Governance could be providing more granular control over security policies."
"The solution lacks the feature to work well with third-party applications."
"Microsoft has done a commendable job with RPAX. However, Microsoft should prioritize enhancing its ABAC (Attribute-Based Access Control) capabilities. Currently, Microsoft's ABAC offering falls behind AWS in comparison."
"Certifications could include additional access levels or practices."
"There is a need for further enhancements, specifically in the multifactor authentication capabilities."
"The user interface could be slightly improved. It could be made simpler and more user-friendly, however, it is good enough right now."
"The solution, in general, is quite expensive."
"The user interface is not very user-friendly."
"I would like to see more Cloud management from this product."
"We have had a lot of service breaks because of the lack of support."
"When it comes to queries and analysis, I find the reporting module to be very low, very simple."
More Microsoft Entra ID Governance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Entra ID Governance is ranked 23rd in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 4 reviews while SailPoint IdentityIQ is ranked 4th in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 61 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID Governance is rated 6.4, while SailPoint IdentityIQ is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Entra ID Governance writes "Offers comprehensive solutions that bring significant benefits". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SailPoint IdentityIQ writes "Flexible, easy to customize, and not too difficult to set up". Microsoft Entra ID Governance is most compared with , whereas SailPoint IdentityIQ is most compared with Saviynt, One Identity Manager, Microsoft Entra ID, ForgeRock and Microsoft Identity Manager. See our Microsoft Entra ID Governance vs. SailPoint IdentityIQ report.
See our list of best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors.
We monitor all Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) 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.
