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."The single sign-on across multiple platforms is really the true advantage here. That gives you one ID and password for access to all your systems. You don't need to manage a plethora of different user IDs and passwords to all the systems that you're going to access."
"The solution has some great features, such as identity governance, and user self-service. The Outlook application is very good and is used by a lot of people even if they are using Google services."
"The most valuable feature is the ease with which a person can log in remotely using only a password or pin without creating a profile or policy."
"Single sign-on provides flexibility and helps because users don't want to remember so many passwords when logging in. It's a major feature. Once you log in, you have access to all the applications. It also enables us to provide backend access controls to our users, especially when it comes to groups, as we are trying to normalize things."
"We're using the whole suite: device management, user credentials, everything that's possible."
"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 way the laptops are joined is valuable. We can take advantage of that in terms of being able to log in and do things. It is easier to change passwords or set things up."
"It's multi-tenant, residing in multiple locations. The authentication happens quickly. Irrespective of whether I'm in Australia, the US, India, or Africa, I don't see any latency. Those are the good features that I rely on."
"From a technical perspective, the solution is very good we can operate and control the user by ourselves."
"Once it is set up, it is easy to use and it integrates with most of the products on the market."
"The MFA is the most valuable aspect."
"The product supports customization."
"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."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"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 was built to be scalable."
"When we add some user groups, at times they will not be properly configured. Also, sometimes Azure AD is not aware of the group policy, like the control, device functions, and settings, in detail. For example, you cannot configure these settings through mobile devices. It doesn't provide the flexibility to do that. The other challenge is that a third-party application may provide access without authorization."
"Compared to what we can do on-prem, Azure AD lacks a feature for multiple hierarchical groups. For example, Group A is part of group B. Group B is part of group C. Then, if I put someone into group A, which is part of already B, they get access to any system that group B has access to, and that provisioning is automatically there."
"In a hybrid deployment, when we update a license by changing the UPN or email address of a user, it does not get updated automatically during normal sync. This means that we have to update it manually from Azure, which is something that needs to be corrected."
"The technical support could improve by having a faster response time."
"Adding a new account can be tricky."
"The robustness of the conditional access feature of the zero trust strategy to verify users is adequate but not comprehensive."
"I would rate it an eight out of ten. The price plays a factor in the rating."
"The solution has not saved costs. While we’ve eliminated some tools, there are some other features that we are dependent on as admin, which are not yet integrated with Azure AD."
"Sometimes if a session takes too long, you have to log in again."
"The mobile access to the solution isn't ideal. They should work to improve its functionality."
"There could be some improvements in the documentation and overall knowledge base of the solution."
"The technical support is not very good at all."
"The initial implementation can definitely be improved because you have to work on several components to configure it correctly."
"May not integrate easily with non-Oracle products."
"The pricing of the solution is in need of improvement. Oracle products are very expensive."
"There are problems with stability."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Access Management with 190 reviews while Oracle Access Manager is ranked 10th 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 "Allows users to authenticate from home and has excellent integrations in a simple, stable solution". 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, Cisco Duo and Yubico YubiKey, whereas Oracle Access Manager is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, ForgeRock, Auth0, F5 BIG-IP Access Policy Manager (APM) and PingID. 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.
