We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and Tools4ever HelloID 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.
"Application integration is easy. MFA and password self-service have reduced most of the supportive work of IT. We use multi-factor authentication. Every access from a user is through multi-factor authentication. There is no legacy authentication. We have blocked legacy authentication methods. For people who use the MDM on mobile, we push our application through Intune. In a hybrid environment, users can work from anywhere. With Intune, we can push policies and secure the data."
"The central authentication server is most valuable. GPOs are useful for user and computer policies."
"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 haven't had any problems with stability. Everything works fine."
"Active Directory itself is the best feature it has. It also gives us a single pane of glass for managing user access."
"Microsoft Azure AD is easy to install and is a stable solution."
"Personally, I'm a great fan of Azure Active Directory due to the security and compliance features that are there in the classic or default Azure Active Directory."
"It certainly centralizes usernames, and it certainly centralizes credentials. Companies have different tolerances for synchronizing those credentials versus redirecting to on-prem. The use case of maturing into the cloud helps from a SaaS adoption standpoint, and it also tends to be the jumping-off point for larger organizations to start doing PaaS and infrastructure as a service. So, platform as a service and infrastructure as a service kind of dovetail off the Active Directory synchronization piece and the email and SharePoint. It becomes a natural step for people, who wouldn't normally do infrastructure as a service, because they're already exposed to this, and they have already set up their email and SharePoint there. All of the components are there."
"Now we can easily control who has access to which client or client application."
"You don't need to be a specialist in Identity and Access Management solutions to understand the software and configure it."
"The most valuable feature is the option to use SSO from different sources such as Microsoft AD, ADFS, Azure AD, SAML, form-based, etc."
"The Single Sign-On capabilities are endless and we haven't found a single app so far that couldn't be set up for SSO."
"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."
"Some of the features that they offer, e.g., customized emails, are not available with B2C. You are stuck with whatever email template they give you, and it is not the best user experience. For B2C, that is a bit of a negative thing."
"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."
"Whatever business requirements we needed in the past three years, users were created, with the name of the user and they were not connected with the Active Directory. We were trying to in house in three years and with directory, but we were not able to achieve it."
"My only pain point in this solution is creating group membership for devices."
"Having more training would be quite helpful."
"Sometimes, what one customer may like, another may not like it. We have had customers asking, "Why is Microsoft forcing us to do this?" For example, when you use Exchange Server on-premise, then you can customize it for your company and these customizations are unlimited. However, if you use Exchange Online or with Microsoft 365, then your ability to make modifications is limited. So, only the cloud versus is limited."
"Microsoft Entra ID's impact on access and identity management is relatively limited."
"I would like to have the built-in provisioning module improved."
"When something needs to be changed with the sign-on policies, we have to apply this manually to every client environment that we have."
"Integration with other Tools4ever applications such as SSRPM and IAM would be nice."
"Sometimes it generates a username that is not unique, but at the time of this writing, it is not possible to generate a new one that is unique."
Earn 20 points
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) with 190 reviews while Tools4ever HelloID is ranked 27th in Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS). Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while Tools4ever HelloID is rated 9.8. 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 Tools4ever HelloID writes "A flexible solution for application management, and facilitated centralization of our IAM". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Ping Identity Platform and Okta Workforce Identity, whereas Tools4ever HelloID is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, Microsoft Entra External ID and Imprivata OneSign. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. Tools4ever HelloID report.
See our list of best Identity and Access Management as a Service (IDaaS) (IAMaaS) vendors and best Single Sign-On (SSO) 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.
