Okta vs Entra ID

Google Workspace includes a basic identity layer that works well for smaller teams. It handles SSO for Google apps and a limited set of third-party SAML integrations. For teams under 50 people running mostly Google-native tools, it can be enough on its own.

The limitations show up at scale. Google Workspace does not offer conditional access policies, SCIM provisioning to most non-Google apps, or compliance-grade governance features like access reviews or privileged identity management. Once you need any of these, you layer Okta or Entra ID on top.

In practice, we see two common patterns. Companies running Google Workspace with a diverse SaaS stack typically add Okta for its broad integration catalogue and FastPass experience. Companies that have migrated to Microsoft 365 or run a hybrid environment typically consolidate on Entra ID because the licensing is already included.

The biggest factor is your existing Microsoft investment. Companies on E3 or E5 already have Entra ID P1 or P2 included. Adding Okta on top means paying twice for identity. Unless you have a specific reason, such as 50+ non-Microsoft apps that need SSO, Entra ID is the pragmatic choice for Microsoft-heavy environments.

That said, Okta's integration catalogue is genuinely superior. If you run Slack, Notion, Figma, AWS, and a dozen other best-of-breed tools, Okta's pre-built SCIM connectors save weeks of custom configuration. Entra ID is catching up but still has gaps with non-Microsoft apps, particularly around automated provisioning and deprovisioning.

Okta FastPass remains a standout feature. It eliminates MFA prompts entirely by using device-bound biometrics. Users never pull out their phone. Microsoft is moving toward similar passwordless flows with Windows Hello and Authenticator phone sign-in, but FastPass works consistently across Mac, Windows, and mobile today.

For conditional access, both platforms are strong. Entra ID's conditional access policies are deeply integrated with Microsoft Defender and Intune. Okta's device trust works well with Jamf, IRU, CrowdStrike, and SentinelOne. Choose based on your endpoint stack. If you run Intune and Defender, Entra is the natural fit. If you run Jamf or IRU with CrowdStrike, Okta ties into those tools more cleanly.

We also see growing demand for lifecycle automation. Okta Workflows provides a visual, no-code builder for joiners, movers, and leavers processes. Entra Lifecycle Workflows is now generally available and covers similar ground, though it is more tightly scoped to the Microsoft ecosystem. For organisations with complex JML requirements spanning multiple platforms, Okta Workflows currently offers more flexibility.

Single sign-on and multi-factor authentication decide who gets in. Identity threat detection and response deals with what happens after that: a session token lifted from a device, an attacker who has already passed MFA, a push-fatigue prompt that someone finally approved. The question is not whether each platform detects these (both do), but where the response happens, and how much of it you already own.

Entra ID Protection scores every sign-in and every user for risk, using signals like leaked credentials, anonymised IPs and improbable travel. Its real value is that those risk scores are a condition inside Conditional Access, so a risky sign-in can be forced through step-up authentication or blocked outright without anyone reading an alert. It needs the P2 tier, which is included in Microsoft 365 E5. If your estate still has domain controllers, Defender for Identity is the piece that watches on-premise Active Directory, and it is a separate product from Entra ID Protection.

Okta splits the same job in two. ThreatInsight is included and works before authentication, blocking or flagging requests from IP addresses already behaving badly across Okta's customer base. Continuous evaluation during a live session (reassessing risk after login and cutting the session when it changes) is Okta's Identity Threat Protection, which is a separately licensed add-on rather than part of the base platform.

The practical split: if you are on E5, you have already bought identity threat detection twice over and the honest advice is to switch it on rather than buy a third product. If you are on Okta with a mixed SaaS estate, budget for the add-on explicitly or accept that your detection stops at the front door.

The failure mode is the same on both platforms, and it is not a licensing one. Risk detection generates alerts, and alerts need somebody whose job it is to act on them. We have walked into estates paying for the top tier with every policy left in report-only mode, which produces a dashboard nobody opens and no actual protection. Turn on automated response (step-up, session revocation, forced password reset) before you buy anything else, because automation is the only part of this that works while everyone is asleep.

Entra ID P1 is included with Microsoft 365 E3 and P2 with E5. If you hold either, the identity licence is already paid for, so the honest comparison is Okta's per-user cost against nothing rather than against Microsoft's list price.

Okta is priced per user per month, per module. Single sign-on, adaptive multi-factor authentication, lifecycle management and Workflows are separate lines, so a quote that only covers single sign-on will look cheaper than the deployment you actually want.

The trap in both directions is the same: buying a governance tier for a feature you will not configure. Access reviews, privileged identity management and access certification only reduce audit effort once someone owns them and runs them on a schedule.

We resell both, so you can see per-seat pricing before committing: Okta licensing and Entra ID P2 licensing.

The licence is the small number. The work is reconnecting every application, rebuilding conditional access, and re-enrolling every user in multi-factor authentication without locking anyone out.

Effort scales with application count rather than headcount. A 200-person company with 15 integrated apps is a shorter project than a 60-person company with 70. Directory-integrated and legacy applications take the longest, because each one needs testing against real sign-ins rather than a switch flip.

We phase it: audit and application inventory, then identity provider build, then applications in waves by blast radius, then multi-factor authentication cutover, then decommission. Nothing goes big-bang, and the old provider stays available until the last wave passes.

Scoping is fixed-price and based on the application inventory. See what the delivery work covers on our Okta and Entra ID implementation service.