# Microsoft Entra ID vs Okta Verify: which do AI models recommend for MFA, October 2026

IT AI Recommendation Index, October 2026 Edition, Multi-factor authentication. Five of fourteen models named Microsoft Entra ID first on the direct prompt; two named Okta Verify. Page: https://it-ai-index.com/identity/multi-factor-authentication/microsoft-entra-id-vs-okta-verify/

| | First-choice share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Models naming it |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Microsoft Entra ID | 30% | #2 of 11 | 0% | 46 | 13 of 14 |
| Okta Verify | 13% | #3 of 11 | 14% | 57 | 14 of 14 |

## The direct prompt, model by model

- Claude Haiku 4.5: both first (first choices: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify)
- GPT-5.4 mini: microsoft entra id first (first choices: Microsoft Entra ID) (alternatives: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify)
- DeepSeek V4 Flash: microsoft entra id first (first choices: Cisco Duo, Microsoft Entra ID) (alternatives: JumpCloud MFA)
- Qwen 3.7 Flash: microsoft entra id first (first choices: Microsoft Entra ID) (alternatives: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify, YubiKey)
- GPT-6 Luna: microsoft entra id first (first choices: Microsoft Entra ID) (alternatives: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify)
- Mistral Small: okta verify first (first choices: Cisco Duo, Okta Verify) (alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID)
- Gemini 3.5 Flash: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify)
- Perplexity Sonar: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: Okta Verify, OneLogin MFA, WorkOS)
- Grok 4.1 Fast: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: JumpCloud Protect, Microsoft Entra ID)
- Kimi K2: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify)
- GLM 4.7 FlashX: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: JumpCloud MFA, Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify, OneLogin MFA)
- MiniMax M2.5: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify)
- Muse Glimmer 30B: neither first, one named (first choices: Cisco Duo) (alternatives: Microsoft Entra ID, Okta Verify, PingOne MFA, SafeNet Trusted Access, SecureAuth Arculix)
- Llama 4 Maverick: neither named

## What the models said about Microsoft Entra ID

- "If you're a Microsoft shop (most B2B mid-market firms are): Microsoft Entra ID MFA using Conditional Access policies — it's the most cost-effective, deeply integrated solution" (DeepSeek V4 Flash, direct prompt, first choice)
- "Tier 1 (Integrated/Free-ish): Microsoft Entra (Azure AD) or Duo (Cisco). ... sticking with Microsoft's native offering is often the path of least resistance and lowest cost." (Qwen 3.7 Flash, scale prompt, first choice)

## What the models said about Okta Verify

- "While many popular commercial MFA apps (Okta, Microsoft Auth, Duo) offer push notifications where you click "Approve," this method has evolved into a vulnerability known as MFA Fatigue" (Qwen 3.7 Flash, negative prompt, soft negative)
- "Duo and Okta are established options, though their pricing is typically quote-based rather than simple low-cost self-serve pricing" (GPT-5.4 mini, budget prompt, soft negative)
- "Caution advised due to: - Multiple security breaches (2022 via third-party vendor, 2023 support system compromise)" (Kimi K2, negative prompt, soft negative)
- "Okta Adaptive MFA - Starts at $2 per user per month... Suitable for medium-sized enterprises and large corporations" (Llama 4 Maverick, paraphrase prompt, first choice)
- "Enterprise SSO + MFA | Okta | Unified identity platform with SSO, lifecycle, governance, and MFA." (GLM 4.7 FlashX, comparative prompt, first choice)
- "For most mid-market B2B companies, Okta or Microsoft Entra ID MFA are solid starting points" (Claude Haiku 4.5, direct prompt, first choice)

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category. Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category. Published under CC BY 4.0; the output is the models' output, and nothing here is a recommendation by the index.