.svg)
Top Okta alternatives for CIAM in 2026
Searching for an Okta alternative usually starts with a specific problem. Maybe your renewal is approaching. Maybe costs are climbing as you add users, applications, environments, or security capabilities. Maybe customer identity now spans several products, contracts, consoles, and policy engines. Or maybe your team is still waiting weeks to launch customer journeys that should take days.
What matters is finding a customer identity product that fits where your business is headed, not just where it is today. That means looking at more than authentication. Architecture, pricing, customer journeys, migration, customer insights, and support for AI agents can all change what the right fit looks like.Β
This guide focuses specifically on customer identity and access management, or CIAM. It does not compare workforce identity products.
Key takeaways
- There is no single best Okta alternative for every organization. The right choice depends on your architecture, operating model, customer experience requirements, migration strategy, budget, and plans for AI agents.
- Basic authentication is table stakes. The bigger differences are how many products and add-ons you need, whether infrastructure is shared or dedicated, how much engineering is required, what customer insights are included, and what the complete production environment will cost.
- Auth0 is an Okta product. It can be a distinct CIAM option for organizations reconsidering an existing Okta architecture, but it does not move you outside the Okta vendor ecosystem.
- AI agents are changing the CIAM evaluation. The question is no longer just whether a product can authenticate an agent. Organizations also need to know who authorized it, what it can do, when human approval is required, and how that authority can be reviewed or revoked.
Editorial note: This guide is published by Strivacity, which is included in the comparison. We used publicly available vendor documentation and have aimed to represent competing products, including areas where they are stronger, as fairly as possible.
Which Okta alternatives are included?Β
CIAM is a broad market, and this is not intended to be a directory of every available vendor.
For this guide, we selected five options that represent different architectural and operational approaches an enterprise might evaluate when reconsidering Okta for customer identity:
- Strivacity: Strong fit for enterprises that want consolidated CIAM, flexible no-code or pro-code options, dedicated SaaS and customer, partner and AI-agent identity in one product.
- Auth0: Strong fit for developer-led application teams that want extensive APIs, SDKs and code-level control.
- Ping Identity: Strong fit for complex global enterprises with broad identity requirements and significant legacy infrastructure.
- Microsoft Entra External ID: Strong fit for organizations already standardized on Microsoft Azure and the broader Entra ecosystem.
- Transmit Security: Strong fit for organizations looking to bring customer identity, identity verification and fraud prevention closer together.
All five can handle core customer authentication. Other CIAM vendors may also be appropriate depending on your requirements.Β
The bigger differences show up in how they are deployed, how many products and add-ons are required, how much engineering they demand, how they price enterprise requirements and how they are approaching AI agents.
Why is Auth0 included in a list of Okta alternatives?
Okta owns Auth0. We include it because organizations evaluating or replacing an existing Okta customer identity architecture may still consider Auth0 as a distinct CIAM product with its own development model, packaging, and architecture.
If leaving the Okta vendor ecosystem altogether is part of your objective, Auth0 obviously does not meet that requirement.
Okta CIAM alternatives compared
Pricing, packaging, and product names change frequently. Published entry pricing is not equivalent to total enterprise cost. Buyers should compare the complete architecture and commercial package proposed for their requirements.
The 5 Okta alternatives compared
1. Strivacity: Strong fit for enterprises simplifying CIAM
Strivacity brings customer, partner and AI-agent identity into one CIAM product, with a dedicated single-instance SaaS environment included for every customer. Published pricing starts at $17,000 per year.
Why consider it: Strivacity is designed for organizations that want to consolidate CIAM capabilities without giving up flexibility. Teams can configure customer journeys visually, extend them with code when needed, and coexist with existing identity providers to modernize gradually. For AI agents, Strivacity connects the agent to the customer or organization granting authority, with controls for consent, permissions, policy, revocation and audit. Strivacity was named a Leader in The Forrester Waveβ’: CIAM Solutions, Q4 2024, receiving the highest possible score in 12 criteria.
What to watch: Strivacity is smaller than Okta, Microsoft and Ping. Buyers should evaluate geographic support, ecosystem requirements and relevant customer references alongside the product.
2. Auth0: Strong fit for developer-led application teams
Auth0 is Okta's developer-focused customer identity offering, with extensive APIs, SDKs, Universal Login, Actions, Forms and authorization capabilities.
Why consider it: Auth0 has a large developer ecosystem and gives engineering teams significant control over authentication and authorization. Its AI-agent tooling now includes MCP and API authorization, secure token storage and human confirmation for sensitive actions. Auth0 is also developing first-class agent identities through its Agents as Principal capability, currently in Early Access.
What to watch: Auth0 is owned by Okta, so it is not an alternative from a vendor-ownership perspective. Private deployment, advanced security and other enterprise requirements can require higher tiers or add-ons. Buyers should also consider how much journey and policy logic their engineering teams will need to build and maintain.
3. Ping Identity: Strong fit for complex global enterprises
Ping Identity offers multiple approaches to CIAM, including PingOne for Customers and PingOne Advanced Identity Cloud, which is based on the former ForgeRock Identity Cloud. Its broader portfolio extends into orchestration, fraud, authorization, governance and AI-agent identity.
Why consider it: Ping has a long history supporting large, regulated and complex identity environments. Its Identity for AI offering now treats agents as first-class identities and supports delegated authority, scoped access, runtime authorization, human approval and auditing.
What to watch: Ping's breadth also means buyers need to understand exactly what they are buying. Ask whether the proposed architecture uses PingOne for Customers, Advanced Identity Cloud, or both, and which additional products, licenses, consoles and Identity for AI capabilities are required.Β
4. Microsoft Entra External ID: Strong fit for Microsoft-centric organizations
Microsoft Entra External ID is Microsoft's customer identity offering for consumer and business-customer applications. Organizations already standardized on Azure and Microsoft Entra may see value in staying within the Microsoft ecosystem.
Why consider it: External ID uses MAU-based pricing with a free tier and gives Microsoft-centric organizations a natural path for customer identity. Microsoft has also introduced Entra Agent ID, which provides purpose-built identities, authentication, authorization and governance for AI agents.
What to watch: Entra Agent ID is part of the broader Microsoft Entra portfolio, not a capability built directly into External ID. Some advanced agent security and governance capabilities also require Microsoft Agent 365 licensing. Organizations migrating from Azure AD B2C (which went end of life in March 2026) should also determine which existing policies and customizations can move directly and which may need to be rebuilt.
5. Transmit Security: Strong fit for combining identity and fraud prevention
Transmit Security's Mosaic offering brings customer identity management, identity verification and fraud prevention together, making it particularly relevant for organizations where customer experience and fraud risk need to be evaluated together.
Why consider it: Transmit has deep fraud and behavioral-risk capabilities alongside CIAM. Its Agent Intelligence capabilities focus on identifying agentic sessions, understanding which agents are interacting with an application and using behavioral signals to classify that activity.
What to watch: Buyers should determine whether Transmit is expected to replace the existing CIAM product, fraud stack, identity-verification tools or all three. For agentic use cases, ask how the product handles delegated customer authority, consent and revocation in addition to detecting and classifying AI-agent activity.
What to compare when replacing Okta
Once you have a shortlist, the evaluation shouldn't come down to who has the longest feature checklist.
Basic authentication is rarely the biggest differentiator among established CIAM products. Most can register customers, authenticate them, issue tokens, support MFA and connect applications.
The meaningful differences appear when you map the complete production requirement.
1. Compare the complete product footprint
A vendor describing its offering as a "platform" doesn't necessarily mean every capability you need is included in one product, contract or administrative experience.
For this comparison:
- One product means primary CIAM capabilities are licensed and administered together.
- Product plus add-ons means important capabilities may require higher tiers or additional licenses.
- Multi-product portfolio means a complete implementation may span multiple separately packaged products or services.
- Product plus supporting components means the core identity service may rely on additional cloud services, third-party products or custom engineering.
Before comparing proposals, ask every vendor for two things:
- A complete architecture showing every product, identity store, policy engine, integration and administrative console.
- A complete commercial bill of materials showing every license, environment, add-on, support plan and professional service required.
That will tell you far more than the advertised starting price.
2. Look beyond entry pricing
The first number on a pricing page rarely represents the full cost of enterprise CIAM.
Depending on the vendor, organizations may pay separately for:
- Advanced security
- Private or dedicated deployment
- Additional environments
- Enterprise connections
- Identity verification
- Fraud prevention
- Orchestration
- Authorization
- Agent governance
- Premium support
- Professional services
Then ask what happens to pricing as:
- Monthly active users grow
- Applications are added
- Brands or business units are introduced
- More geographic regions are required
- Enterprise connections increase
- Security requirements become more sophisticated
The goal is to understand the economics of the architecture you'll actually run.
3. Understand shared versus dedicated architecture
Identity sits at the front door of the customer experience and often holds some of an organization's most sensitive customer data. That makes deployment architecture worth understanding.
A dedicated environment can provide independent capacity, predictable performance, stronger fault isolation and greater control over maintenance and regional deployment.
This distinction may become even more important as AI agents create additional traffic. People typically sign in and then interact with an application. Agents can make many more requests, often in bursts. Organizations should understand whether that traffic shares capacity with other customers and how spikes are handled.
Ask:
- Is the complete production environment dedicated or only selected infrastructure?
- Is capacity shared with other customers?
- What happens during significant traffic spikes?
- How are incidents isolated between tenants?
- Who controls maintenance windows?
- Does dedicated infrastructure cost extra?
- Are multiple data-residency regions included or separately priced?
Vendors also use terms such as "dedicated," "isolated" and "private" differently. Don't discover what those terms actually mean after the contract is signed.
4. Decide who should be able to change customer journeys
Developer flexibility matters. But there's another question that often matters more:
Who will own the customer journey after implementation?
If adding a field, changing an authentication step, updating consent or adjusting an onboarding flow requires code, testing and an engineering release every time, customer identity can turn into a permanent development project.
Evaluate:
- What can be configured visually?
- What requires custom code?
- What requires professional services?
- Can digital or customer-experience teams safely make changes?
- Can developers extend those journeys when code is genuinely needed?
- How are customizations maintained as the product changes?
This is where the vendors differ considerably. Strivacity combines visual journey orchestration with code, SDKs and APIs in the same product.
Auth0 remains strongly developer led, although Actions and Forms provide some lower-code capabilities.
Ping supports both visual orchestration and pro-code requirements, but capabilities may span different products in the portfolio.
Microsoft provides user flows for more standard scenarios, while more complex requirements can move teams into custom policy development.
Transmit Security provides visual orchestration alongside SDKs and developer tooling.
The right answer isn't always "no code" or "more code." It's having the choice.
5. Look for customer insights, not just identity logs
Most CIAM products can tell an administrator whether an authentication succeeded or failed.
That is not the same as helping the business understand what customers are experiencing.
For digital, CX, product and security teams, useful identity insights should answer questions such as:
- Where are customers abandoning sign up or sign in?
- Which authentication methods are creating the most friction?
- Where are password resets, MFA challenges or verification steps failing?
- Which journeys, applications or customer segments are performing differently?
- Are fraud controls stopping bad activity without creating unnecessary friction for good customers?
- Did a change to a journey improve completion rates or make them worse?
Ask whether those answers are available in out-of-the-box dashboards or whether your team will need to export identity logs into another analytics product, build custom queries and create the dashboards itself.
This matters because customer identity sits directly in the path of acquisition, conversion and retention. If the product only tells you that authentication happened, but not where customers struggle or why, it is harder to continuously improve the experience.
Strivacity includes customer insights dashboards in the product so security, digital and customer-experience teams can see identity behavior and journey performance without building a separate analytics layer.
6. Treat migration as more than moving profile data
Importing usernames and customer attributes is only one part of a CIAM migration.
Credential portability can determine whether customers move quietly in the background or are forced through a password reset.
Ask both the existing and future provider:
- Can password hashes be exported?
- Which hashing algorithms are supported?
- Can those hashes be imported into the new product?
- Is just-in-time migration supported?
- Can both identity systems coexist during migration?
- Can credentials temporarily be validated against the incumbent?
- What happens when complete credential data can't be exported?
A migration strategy should minimize disruption for customers, not simply move database records.
7. Evaluate data residency and sovereignty separately
Data residency and data sovereignty are related, but they aren't identical. Data residency describes where customer data is physically stored. Data sovereignty can involve a much broader set of considerations, including:
- The vendor's legal jurisdiction
- Which legal entity contracts with you
- Who operates the environment
- Where support teams are located
- Which subprocessors can access data
- Who controls encryption keys
- Whether infrastructure is shared or dedicated
- Whether workloads can operate in customer-controlled infrastructure
A European headquarters doesn't automatically guarantee complete sovereignty. Likewise, a US-headquartered vendor isn't automatically unsuitable if it provides appropriate regional infrastructure, strict operational controls and customer-controlled encryption.
Ask every provider:
- Where are customer data, backups and logs stored?
- Can that data move outside the selected region?
- Which employees and subprocessors can access the environment?
- Who owns and controls encryption keys?
- Can the vendor access customer-held keys?
- Is infrastructure shared or dedicated?
- What happens to customer data when the contract ends?
Strivacity supports dedicated regional deployments as well as Bring Your Own Key (BYOK) and Hold Your Own Key (HYOK) models. Under HYOK, the customer retains control of the encryption keys rather than providing them to Strivacity.
8. Ask how the product handles AI-agent identity
AI agents are creating a new identity problem. Authenticating an agent is only the beginning. For customer-facing use cases, organizations increasingly need to determine:
- Who is the agent?
- Which customer or business authorized it?
- What is it allowed to do?
- How long does that authority last?
- When is additional human approval required?
- How can authority be reviewed or revoked?
- Who is accountable for the action?
That distinction matters because vendors are approaching agent identity differently. Some are extending workforce or machine-identity controls. Some are focused on detecting bots or malicious automation. Some provide developer tooling for building agentic applications. Others are connecting an agent directly to the customer or organization whose authority it is exercising.
As you evaluate vendors, don't stop at: "Can you authenticate an AI agent?"
Ask: "Can you prove who authorized it, control what it can do on that person's behalf and let the customer review or revoke that authority?"
That is a much harder question.
Use a proof of value, not just a proof of concept
Almost every established CIAM vendor can build a sign in flow for a demo. That proves the product works. It doesn't prove it will make your business faster, your customers happier or your identity operation simpler.
A better evaluation is a proof of value. Take one or two real customer journeys and see what it actually takes to build, operate, measure and improve them.
Instead of asking only, "Can the product do this?" measure:
- Time to launch: How quickly can the team build or change a real customer journey?
- Business ownership: Can digital or CX teams make common changes themselves, or does every change require engineering?
- Customer experience: Can you see where customers encounter friction, abandon a journey or struggle with authentication?
- Out-of-the-box insight: Are dashboards and customer insights available immediately, or do you need to build a separate analytics layer?
- Engineering effort: Which requirements need code, custom integrations or ongoing maintenance?
- Product footprint: How many products, consoles and policy engines are actually required?
- Migration: Can existing customers move without unnecessary disruption or forced password resets?
- Economics: Are the capabilities demonstrated in the proof of value actually included in the quoted price?
- AI-agent readiness: Can an agent's authority be tied back to the customer or organization it represents, controlled and revoked?
And don't run the test entirely on the vendor's terms. Give each vendor the same real-world requirement. Then introduce a change midway through the evaluation and see how quickly they adapt. Most identity products can make the happy path look good in a demo. The real test is what happens when the customer journey changes, the migration gets complicated or the business asks a question nobody scripted in advance.
The goal is to prove that your organization can create, measure and improve customer identity experiences faster and with less complexity.
Questions to ask every Okta alternative
Before choosing a CIAM vendor, ask:
- Which capabilities are included in the quoted price?
- Which require separate products, tiers or add-ons?
- How many products, identity stores, policy engines and consoles will our team operate?
- Is the production environment shared or dedicated?
- Which data-residency regions are available?
- Do different regions or dedicated environments cost extra?
- Who owns and controls the encryption keys?
- Can we import and export supported password hashes?
- Can migration happen gradually while both systems coexist?
- Can business teams change customer journeys without an engineering release?
- What customer insights and dashboards are included out of the box?
- Can we see where customers abandon or struggle within identity journeys without building our own analytics layer?
- How are customers, partners, organizations and delegated administrators modeled?
- Can customers approve, restrict, review and revoke an AI agent's authority?
- How will pricing change as users, applications, brands, regions and enterprise connections grow?
The answers usually reveal more than a feature checklist.
Which Okta alternative is right for you?
There isn't one answer for every organization.
Choose Strivacity if you're looking to consolidate customer, partner and AI-agent identity into one product, want dedicated single-instance SaaS by default, need both visual journey configuration and code-level extensibility, and want out-of-the-box visibility into customer identity experiences.
Choose Auth0 if your application developers want deep API and SDK control and are comfortable owning more of the identity experience in code.
Choose Ping Identity if you're operating a complex global identity environment and need the breadth of a large multi-product portfolio.
Choose Microsoft Entra External ID if Microsoft is already a strategic technology provider and alignment with Azure and the wider Entra ecosystem matters more than minimizing the number of identity components.
Choose Transmit Security if customer identity, fraud prevention, behavioral intelligence and identity verification need to converge in the same architecture.
Most established Okta alternatives can authenticate customers. That isn't the hard part anymore.
The meaningful differences are:
- How many products does it take?
- What's actually included in the price?
- Is your production environment shared or dedicated?
- Who can change customer journeys after launch?
- Can you see where customers are struggling without building your own analytics layer?
- How difficult will migration be?
- How much engineering will the product require?
- Can the same identity model govern customers, partners and AI agents acting on their behalf?
For enterprises prioritizing dedicated infrastructure, simpler packaging, flexible customer journeys, built-in customer insights, and customer, partner and AI-agent identity in one product, Strivacity is a strong place to begin an evaluation.
But every vendor, including Strivacity, should be required to prove those claims in its architecture, commercial proposal and proof of value.
Start with the problems that caused you to look for an Okta alternative. Then make every vendor prove it can solve them.
Frequently asked questions about Okta alternatives
What is the top alternative to Okta for CIAM?
There is no single best alternative for every organization.
Strivacity is well suited to enterprises that want dedicated single-instance SaaS, consolidated CIAM capabilities, flexible customer journeys and customer, partner and AI-agent identity in one product.
Auth0 fits developer-led application teams.
Ping Identity fits complex enterprises that require a broad identity portfolio.
Microsoft Entra External ID fits organizations already standardized on Microsoft's ecosystem.
Transmit Security fits organizations looking to combine CIAM with broader fraud-prevention and identity-verification capabilities.
The right choice depends on the architecture, operating model, migration requirements and economics your organization needs.
Is Auth0 the same as Okta Customer Identity?
No. Okta owns Auth0, but Auth0 and Okta's other identity products have different histories, infrastructure and product models.
Auth0 was previously marketed as Okta Customer Identity Cloud and is now primarily marketed again under the Auth0 name, sometimes as "Auth0 by Okta."
Buyers should confirm exactly which product is being proposed and how it relates to any existing Okta environment.
What is the difference between Okta Workforce Identity and customer identity?
Okta Workforce Identity is primarily designed for employees, contractors, internal applications and enterprise resources.
Customer identity products are designed for external populations such as customers, citizens, patients, students, members and business partners.
This guide focuses exclusively on customer identity.
Why do companies evaluate alternatives to Okta?
Common reasons include:
- Cost growth
- Product or packaging complexity
- Dependence on additional products or add-ons
- Engineering dependency
- Deployment and isolation requirements
- Migration flexibility
- Data-residency requirements
- The need to manage customers, partners, organizations and AI agents more consistently
The decision is often about the architecture and operating model required to deliver the complete customer experience.
What is the difference between PingOne for Customers and PingOne Advanced Identity Cloud?
PingOne for Customers is Ping's cloud customer identity offering combining authentication, user management, MFA and orchestration.
PingOne Advanced Identity Cloud is based on the former ForgeRock Identity Cloud and has a different architectural foundation.
Organizations evaluating Ping should ask which product is being proposed, whether both are involved and which additional products or Identity for AI capabilities are required.
Which Okta alternatives support AI agents?
Several vendors now provide capabilities related to AI-agent identity.
Strivacity connects agents to customer and partner authorization, consent, policy and audit.
Auth0 provides developer tooling for agentic applications, including MCP and API authorization, token handling and human approval.
Ping Identity provides first-class agent identities, delegated authority, runtime access and governance through Identity for AI.
Microsoft provides agent identity capabilities through Entra Agent ID and the broader Entra ecosystem.
Transmit Security focuses on detecting, understanding and controlling autonomous systems interacting with customer applications through Agent Intelligence.
The key question is whether the architecture merely recognizes or authenticates an agent or also connects it to the authority of the customer or organization it represents.
Which Okta alternative provides dedicated SaaS?
Strivacity provides a dedicated single-instance SaaS environment by default.
Other vendors may offer private, isolated, regional or dedicated deployment options depending on the product and commercial package. Buyers should ask exactly what "dedicated" means.
It can refer to the entire product, selected infrastructure, a database, specific compute resources or a premium deployment tier.
Can I migrate from Okta without forcing customers to reset their passwords?
Potentially. Common strategies include:
- Importing supported password hashes
- Migrating customers as they authenticate
- Temporarily validating credentials against the existing identity provider
- Running both products during a phased migration
The available approach depends on what credential data the incumbent can export and which hashing algorithms the destination product supports. Confirm both sides of that equation before signing a migration agreement.
Are European CIAM vendors automatically better for data sovereignty?
No. Corporate headquarters are only one part of the sovereignty question.
Organizations should also evaluate:
- Deployment location
- Operator access
- Subprocessors
- Legal jurisdiction
- Infrastructure isolation
- Encryption-key control
- Support locations
- Customer-controlled infrastructure options
A European-headquartered provider may satisfy specific procurement or jurisdiction requirements, but sovereignty should be evaluated across the complete operating model.
Methodology and sources
We compared vendors across eight areas: deployment architecture, product footprint, pricing and packaging, customer-journey flexibility, customer insights and operational visibility, migration requirements, data residency and sovereignty, and support for emerging requirements including AI agents.
We focused on products enterprises are most likely to evaluate when replacing or reconsidering Okta for customer identity, rather than attempting to list every authentication tool available. Pricing and packaging reflect publicly available information reviewed in August 2026. Where vendors donβt publish complete enterprise pricing, directional indicators are used instead of attempting to estimate specific contract values. Enterprise pricing, packaging and product names can change frequently, so buyers should confirm current terms directly with each vendor before making a purchasing decision.
Sources: Strivacity pricing Β· Strivacity for Agentic AI Β· Auth0 pricing Β· Auth0 for AI Agents (GA announcement) Β· Auth0 Agents as Principal (FGA modeling docs) Β· Ping Identity deployment options Β· Ping Identity Agentic AI Identity solution Β· Ping Identity Agent IAM Core Β· Ping Identity: Defining the Runtime Identity Standard for Autonomous AI Β· Ping Identity pricing (PingOne) Β· PingOne for Customers product page Β· Microsoft Entra External ID data residency Β· Microsoft Entra External ID pricing Β· Microsoft Entra Agent ID overview Β· Transmit Security pricing Β· Transmit Security platform datasheet Β· Transmit Security: Mosaic and the era of consumer AI agents
Last reviewed: August 2026
Editorial disclosure: Strivacity publishes this guide and is included among the alternatives evaluated. Product, packaging, architecture, and pricing information was reviewed against publicly available vendor materials. Buyers should confirm current capabilities and commercial terms directly with each provider.