We performed a comparison between Microsoft Entra ID and PingID based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Authentication Systems solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It helps with privacy control of identity data. It makes security very easy."
"Single sign-on is the reason we use AD."
"What I like about Microsoft Authenticator is that it has good features. I also like that the tool is straightforward to use. Microsoft Authenticator also has a good UI that's very simple to use. I also like that I didn't find any limitations or negative aspects from the features of the tool because Microsoft Authenticator is not an extensive application. It has a two-factor based authentication which validates the user through the password, then it approves authentication."
"The most valuable feature is the conditional access policies. This gives us the ability to restrict who can access which applications or the portal in specific ways."
"Technical support has been great."
"Just because I've been in the Azure space since it started out and in the Microsoft Cloud AD since the BPOS days in the early 2000s, and it's just a product that made life simpler for my clients to be able to integrate everything."
"The scalability of the product is decent."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to set up conditional access, where you can enforce users to connect using multifactor authentication."
"It is a scalable solution...It is a stable solution."
"It's pretty stable as a product."
"The solution has a smooth and configurable user interface for single sign-on capabilities."
"It gets a mobility portal in place in conjunction with Office 365. It provides very good possibilities and it's much better than other technology that we have used before which was unstable and slower."
"We use the product to run different reports."
"The only feature we were looking for in PingID was SSO integration with our existing web app."
"It provides ease of connecting all our devices."
"I find the auto-discovery feature the most valuable. It helps us automate a lot of things using a single password across applications."
"The Cloud Provisioning Agent cannot provision a lot of the information that AD Connect does. For starters, the lightweight version cannot synchronize device information. If you have computers on-premises, the information about them will not be synchronized by the Cloud Provisioning Agent. In addition, if you have a user on the cloud and he changes his password, that information should be written back to the on-premises instance. But that workflow cannot be done with the lightweight agent. It can only be done with the more robust version."
"Many of the features are outdated, so the UI and UX could be improved."
"The solution could be improved when it comes to monitoring and logging as these are the most critical areas in case something was to go wrong."
"Our users sometimes experience issues from having multiple Microsoft accounts, which can cause some confusion and hassle."
"I had some issues with the Azure Active Directory on Windows XP. However, it worked well on Windows 7."
"Microsoft Entra ID should improve workload identities. It should set conditional access."
"They can improve how people manage their accounts. They can simplify and provide more information about adding or updating a phone number or email id in the MSA account. A lot of time users do get confused about where to go. For example, if I've changed my mobile number, where do I go and change my mobile number in the MSA account? A lot of time, employees think if they change the phone number in the HR database, it'll automatically get changed on the MSA account, which is not the case. Microsoft can simplify that and add these questions in the FAQ documents as well."
"When it comes to identity and access life cycle management for applications that are run on-premises, as well as access governance, if those kinds of capabilities could be built into Azure Active Directory, that would be good."
"We have encountered instances where it is not easy to do authentication."
"PingID would benefit from a better user interface for integration."
"The timing of the token validity, if it could be extended, would be great. I'm not sure if there is even an option to configure these types of settings."
"I think that the connection with like Microsoft Word, especially for Office 365, is a weak point that could be improved."
"In the beginning, the initial setup was very complex."
"PingID classifies the type of environment into internal and external, which is an area for improvement because you need to take additional steps to trust internal and external users."
"They could use some bio-certification. It's just more user-friendly and more convenient than entering the one time passes. That would be an improvement."
"The management console needs to be improved. PingID should revise it."
Microsoft Entra ID is ranked 1st in Authentication Systems with 190 reviews while PingID is ranked 7th in Authentication Systems with 14 reviews. Microsoft Entra ID is rated 8.6, while PingID is rated 8.4. 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 PingID writes " A robust cloud-based multi-factor solution with a good customer support team". Microsoft Entra ID is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Google Cloud Identity, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager, Yubico YubiKey and Microsoft Entra Verified ID, whereas PingID is most compared with ForgeRock, PingFederate, SailPoint IdentityIQ, RSA SecurID and Symantec Siteminder. See our Microsoft Entra ID vs. PingID report.
See our list of best Authentication Systems vendors.
We monitor all Authentication Systems 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.
