IdP comparisonOkta vs Entra ID.
Okta vs Entra ID.
Neutrality vs gravity.
The most common identity bake-off in the enterprise: the neutral specialist against the ecosystem default. Here is how they actually differ, and the deployment question neither of them can answer.
Okta
The independent identity leader: a vendor-neutral cloud IdP with the largest third-party integration network and a product for nearly every workforce identity need.
Strengths
- Vendor-neutral: treats every app and cloud equally
- 7,000+ app integration network with deep SAML/SCIM coverage
- Mature admin experience and documentation
- Broad product family across workforce and customer identity
Considerations
- SaaS-only: no self-hosted option for sovereignty requirements
- Compare suite limits and the total quote for your requirements
- Governance (OIG) and privileged access (OPA) are separate paid products
- Your identity plane depends on a third-party cloud’s availability
Microsoft Entra ID
Microsoft’s identity platform (formerly Azure AD): the default choice for Microsoft-centric estates, bundled into M365 licensing with deep Windows and Azure integration.
Strengths
- Effectively included with M365 E3/E5 licensing many orgs already own
- Deep integration with Windows, Azure, and Office
- Strong conditional access engine
- Hybrid story with on-prem Active Directory
Considerations
- Optimized for the Microsoft ecosystem; third-party depth varies
- Full capabilities require P2 / E5 tiers and add-ons
- Complex licensing matrix across P1, P2, Governance, and Suite add-ons
- Non-Microsoft legacy apps often need extra tooling
Side by side
Dimension by dimension.
Compare product coverage. “Supported” does not mean included in the entry price. Read each value alongside its plan, additional-product, and deployment conditions.
| Capability / scope | Okta | Microsoft Entra ID | Monofor |
|---|---|---|---|
| Deployment model | SaaS only | SaaS (hybrid via AD Connect) | Self-hosted or SaaS, same product |
| Third-party app catalog | 7,000+ (OIN) | Large, Microsoft-first depth | 7,000+ pre-built |
| MFA incl. passkeys | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Conditional / adaptive access | Yes | Yes, strong | Yes |
| Identity governance Access reviews, certification | Essentials+ | P2 / Governance add-on | Included |
| Privileged access management | Suite-dependent OPA | PIM (Azure-centric) | Monopam; separate concurrent-session license |
| Legacy protocol bridges RADIUS, LDAP, header-based apps | RADIUS, LDAP Interface, Access Gateway | Partial (via Azure services) | RADIUS + LDAP + access gateway included |
| Vendor neutrality | High | Microsoft-centric | High |
| ITDR / identity risk | ITP; suite-dependent | Higher tier (P2) | Built in: SSF/CAEP both directions |
| AI agent identity governance | Okta for AI Agents | Entra Agent ID; security and governance require Agent 365 | Built in, with an MCP gateway |
| Pricing | Starter: $6/user/month; annual | Bundled / P1 / P2 tiers + add-ons | Monosign from $4/user/mo; Monopam separately licensed |
| Data sovereignty control | Regional cloud tenants | Regional cloud tenants | Full: runs in your infrastructure |
General comparison reflects July 2026 information. Okta packaging and both vendors’ AI agent documentation were reviewed on September 22, 2026. Okta and Microsoft Entra ID are trademarks of their respective owners; Monofor is not affiliated with or endorsed by either. Spotted something out of date? Tell us.
Choose Okta if…
- Your stack is genuinely multi-vendor and you want an identity plane with no ecosystem agenda.
- Best-of-breed SaaS integration depth matters more than bundle economics.
- You are comfortable with cloud identity and suite-based licensing.
Choose Microsoft Entra ID if…
- Your estate is Microsoft-first and E3/E5 licensing is already budgeted.
- Windows, Azure, and Office integration outweigh third-party depth.
- Hybrid AD continuity is a hard requirement.
The third optionOr take the neutrality
Or take the neutrality
without giving up your infrastructure.
Monosign is vendor-neutral like Okta, with a 7,000+ app catalog, and it deploys self-hosted in your own datacenter or cloud tenant, which neither Okta nor Entra ID offers. Monosign combines IAM and IGA from $4 per user per month. Monopam adds PAM with separate concurrent-session licensing.
Self-hosted or cloud: the sovereignty answer SaaS-only IdPs can’t give
Monosign IAM + IGA; Monopam separately licensed
Federates with Entra ID and consumes Okta during migration
FAQ
Common questions.
- Okta vs Entra ID: which should we choose?
- If your estate is Microsoft-first and E3/E5 licensing is already on the table, Entra ID is hard to beat economically. If you run a heterogeneous stack and want an identity plane that treats every vendor equally, Okta’s neutrality and integration network are its case. The trade-offs are cost stacking on Okta’s side and ecosystem gravity on Microsoft’s.
- Where does Monofor fit into this comparison?
- Monofor keeps Okta-style vendor neutrality and a comparable app catalog, then adds what neither offers together: a self-hosted deployment option for sovereignty-bound organizations, plus Monosign governance and separately licensed Monopam privileged access in one platform.
- Can Monofor coexist with Entra ID?
- Yes, this is common. Entra ID stays as the Microsoft ecosystem directory while Monosign federates with it and handles the rest: non-Microsoft SaaS, legacy web apps via the access gateway, VPNs via RADIUS, and appliances via LDAP. You keep E3 value without forcing everything through one vendor.
- What about migrating away from Okta?
- Monosign consumes Okta as an upstream IdP during transition, so apps move one at a time with no sign-in disruption. Directory sync keeps both sides consistent until cutover, and a scoped product quote lets you compare total migration and operating costs.
Ready to start managing
identities the right way?
Spin up a fully-loaded trial tenant in under five minutes. No credit card. No sales gate.