We performed a comparison between Auth0 and NetIQ 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 most important thing for me is compliance. Everything that they have developed in Auth0 is already certified by many regulators such as ISO. So, we do not need to take care of that. We have the shared responsibility model to share assets with other products we are using in the cloud."
"It is easily connected and easy to put our app in single sign-on."
"The most valuable feature is interface application integration, but we haven't fully used it yet. We'll need it in the future for a few potential clients."
"It supports identity federation, FSO and multi-tenancy."
"It's a very powerful platform. It has the ability to do the usual stuff, according to modern protocols, like OIDC and OAuth 2. But the real benefit of using the platform comes from its flexibility to enhance it with rules and, now, with what they call authentication pipelines. That is the most significant feature, as it allows you to customize everything regarding the authentication and authorization process."
"I simply use the JWT from the client on the server side to process requests and push updated profile data to a database/queue as needed and end the process without having to persist data in the web server (sessions)."
"The valuable features are that it is extremely secure and that it's developer-friendly."
"It has improved our organization by providing login authentication for a mobile app."
"The most valuable features of NetIQ Access Manager are SSO and Multi-Factor Authentication."
"It's very easy to integrate with applications."
"The single sign-on feature is excellent."
"There are lots of options to customize the solution to your needs."
"The features that we have found most valuable with NetIQ Access Manager are its single sign-on and two factor two second factor database."
"The price modelling is a bit confusing on the site and can be costly."
"I think they can do a better job in explaining what you're supposed to do next in order to correctly follow an idiomatic approach to using the solution beyond simply passing a JWT token to a server and having the server check then signature to validate the token."
"This is a costly solution and the price of it should be reduced."
"There could be easy integration with IoT devices for the product."
"When they introduced the Organizations feature they did support different login screens per organization. However, they introduced a dependency between this feature and another called the New Universal Login Experience. The New Experience is a more lightweight login screen, but it is much less customizable. For example, today, we are able to fully customize our login screen and even control the background image according to the time of day. We have code to do that. But we are not able to write code anymore in the New Experience."
"There are indeed areas where the product could improve. For instance, Okta offers various application configurations, enabling access management, which the tool could consider implementing."
"The product support for multi-tenancy could be improved."
"The product could use a more flexible administration structure"
"In terms of what could be improved, I would say the security of the infrastructure and the server and the working networking device."
"The application portal could be improved with more options and easier customization."
"Classification of junctions and new versions of applications, such as APIs, can be added to enable the use of more devices that utilize biometrics for Multi-Factor Authentication to improve the solution."
"Having the ability to easily extract and view and compare and version control configurations would be ideal."
"I would love to see the upgrade procedure handled more effectively. I would prefer to have OVS installation possibilities, although the upgrade procedures should include the OS as well. You should be able to use the whole application as an appliance."
Auth0 is ranked 2nd in Access Management with 14 reviews while NetIQ Access Manager is ranked 14th in Access Management with 5 reviews. Auth0 is rated 8.2, while NetIQ Access Manager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Auth0 writes "Has good documentation but improvement is needed in MFA and application configurations ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetIQ Access Manager writes "Multi-Factor Authentication, stable, and extremely scalable". Auth0 is most compared with Microsoft Entra ID, Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, Cloudflare Access and ForgeRock, whereas NetIQ Access Manager is most compared with Okta Workforce Identity, Microsoft Entra ID, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Symantec Siteminder. See our Auth0 vs. NetIQ 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.
