Tenant migration tools: how to choose

How to choose tools between tenants by workload and expected result

Tools for migrating between tenants must be evaluated against the output that the organization needs to preserve. Mail, files, and collaboration may require different methods. Even within the same workload there are properties with different treatment: members, permissions, versions, links or conversations. The proposal must indicate what each tool solves and what work will be left out of its execution.

In a consolidation, one tool may fit with mail while another is used for a document portion. The join should have clear boundaries on which objects each creates or modifies. If both act on the same destination without coordination, it may be difficult to distinguish a limitation of the method from a conflict introduced by the migration sequence itself.

The evaluation matrix should include origin and destination requirements, identity preparation, licenses, and validation evidence. The pilot tests these conditions with common cases and difficult cases. The criterion is not to accumulate more products, but to have the minimum set that covers the scope and that the team can clearly manage and investigate.

How to incorporate manual labor into the comparison

A tool can transfer a piece of data and leave behind an important task of reconstruction. This intervention must appear in the estimate along with the license cost. During the pilot, the effort to prepare, execute, correct and validate is measured, using the same scope for each alternative. This avoids comparing prices that correspond to different results.

The final choice must include the accepted limitations and how they will be communicated to the user. You must also specify who will retain the reports and remove any access granted when the job is completed. This perspective makes it easier to compare options by their operational fit and avoids depending on a demonstration that only shows the simplest transfer case.

Why you shouldn’t start the project by choosing a tool

It is very common to receive a request like: “We have to migrate two tenants. Should we use Quest or BitTitan?” The question comes too soon. Before comparing tools, it would be necessary to know, at a minimum, the real distribution of the data:

A tool that fits perfectly with 100 mailboxes may not be the best for an environment with 70 Teams, 300 SharePoint sites, and an Active Directory spinoff. Therefore, the logical order is: discovery → scope → architecture → tool comparison → pilot → final decision.

The four tool families that appear in a Microsoft 365 migration

Not all the tools we use during a migration are migration tools in the strict sense.

This classification avoids comparing tools that do not really compete with each other.

Native Microsoft tools for inter-tenant migrations

Microsoft’s native capabilities have evolved considerably. Microsoft currently distinguishes between migrations carried out with individual tools per workload and a coordinated migration through Microsoft 365 Migration Orchestrator. This means that it is no longer correct to generically state that “Microsoft does not have tenant-to-tenant tools.” Yes, it does, although its coverage, licensing and behavior must be analyzed on a workload-by-workload basis.

Official reference: Microsoft – Microsoft 365 Migration Overview.

Microsoft 365 Migration Orchestrator

Migration Orchestrator It is Microsoft’s attempt to solve one of the big problems of tenant-to-tenant migrations: coordinating different workloads of the same user without treating them as completely independent projects. Microsoft guides you in mergers, acquisitions, divestitures and business reorganizations. The documentation available at the time of writing this guide continues to indicate that tenant-to-tenant functionality with Orchestrator is in preview, so their availability, requirements and capabilities must be checked before designing a production project.

What the orchestrated approach brings

The main advantage is coordination. Microsoft knows the dependencies between its own workloads and can manage sequences within the supported set. For example, Teams has dependencies on Exchange and OneDrive, and certain workloads should not run in any order. The migration is organized in batches and Microsoft offers a prior validation phase to check application requirements, relationships between tenants, licenses and identity mapping.

Official reference: Microsoft – Migration Orchestrator Overview. When to assess it. It is of particular interest when the project fits well with the supported workloads and the organization prefers to keep movement within Microsoft’s capabilities. However, if there are many transformation needs, advanced coexistence, complex Teams, specific reporting or multiple workloads not covered by the current model, a specialized platform can simplify the project.

Microsoft Cross-Tenant Mailbox Migration

Microsoft has a native solution for moving Exchange Online mailboxes between tenants using MRS and Exchange Online PowerShell. It is not an IMAP copy or an export/import. The user must be properly prepared at the destination as MailUser and the procedure retains specific routing and coexistence logic after the move. Benefits. As a native capability, the move is done within Exchange Online and is a good fit for certain mailbox-centric projects.

Aspects you should check.

Official reference: Microsoft – Cross-Tenant Mailbox Migration.

Microsoft Cross-Tenant OneDrive Migration

Microsoft also has a native ability to move OneDrive accounts between tenants. It is important to understand its behavior because it is different from that of many third-party SaaS tools. Microsoft currently defines the process as one-and-done– Content is moved from source to destination and a redirect is placed at the old location. There is no first copy followed by multiple delta passes.

A maximum of 4,000 OneDrives can be scheduled simultaneously in the queue and Microsoft documents a maximum of 5 TB or one million items per OneDrive. When it can be attractive. When direct move behavior fits with cutover and the company does not need an incremental premigration model. When to compare with a specialized tool. When looking for several passes, an operation other than pre-stage, consolidated reporting with other workloads or greater flexibility in certain transformations.

Official reference: Microsoft – Cross-Tenant OneDrive Migration.

Microsoft Cross-Tenant SharePoint Migration

Microsoft also has a specific solution for moving SharePoint sites between tenants. This capability currently covers sites connected to Microsoft 365 Groups—including sites associated with Teams—modern sites without Groups, and classic sites, but there are limitations that should be considered before choosing it.

Its existence makes Microsoft native currently a real alternative also for projects with SharePoint, as long as the architecture fits these requirements. Official reference: Microsoft – Cross-Tenant SharePoint Migration.

Quest On Demand Migration

Quest On Demand Migration is probably one of the platforms worth evaluating first when the project spans multiple components of Microsoft 365. Quest is currently publishing support within its ecosystem for Exchange Online, OneDrive, SharePoint Online, Microsoft Teams, Microsoft 365 Groups and Chats, Power BI, email domains, Active Directory and Microsoft Entra ID. The main difference compared to using several independent native tools is the existence of a platform specifically oriented to discovery, mapping, execution, monitoring and coexistence.

What Quest especially contributes

Quest also continues to evolve. During 2026 Quest has incorporated improvements to Teams and SharePoint, including greater control over team and channel filters, migration of SharePoint Groups membership within certain Teams processes and new mapping possibilities in SharePoint. This is relevant because it shows why it is not advisable to use a comparison of tools written several years ago to make a current decision.

Official reference: Quest – On Demand Migration. When would I evaluate it especially. In mergers and acquisitions with several workloads, migrations with relevant Teams and SharePoint, projects with hybrid identity, devices or scenarios where coexistence and centralized management are needed. What to check before buying. Quest uses plans and modules with different capabilities. Exact business coverage should be validated based on workload, number of users, Domain Move or Domain Rewrite needs, and any additional components.

It is not advisable to quote only “one Quest license per user” without first validating what functionality the project really needs.

ShareGate: much more than SharePoint

For a long time ShareGate was especially associated with SharePoint and Teams. In 2026 its tenant-to-tenant positioning is broader. ShareGate currently presents its solution as a flow that covers identities, mailboxes, and content., in addition to its well-known SharePoint, OneDrive and Microsoft Teams capabilities. This forces us to review old comparisons in which ShareGate was automatically discarded for projects that included Exchange.

SharePoint and Teams continue to be one of its strengths. ShareGate allows you to select and reorganize content, migrate entire Teams or specific channels and work on SharePoint structures with a highly focused approach to administration and transformation. For Teams, ShareGate currently releases support for things like: standard and private channels, permissions, files, associated SharePoint sites, tabs, apps and Planner, with documented limitations that must be consulted for each case.

Mailboxes. ShareGate Migrate already includes mailbox copying capabilities and has continued to include mapping, app authentication, and automation improvements throughout 2026. Identities Entra ID. ShareGate launched an Entra ID identity migration functionality in beta in 2026 within certain plans. Precisely because it is a relatively new functionality, it is advisable to confirm the current state and limitations before making it a critical production piece.

Official reference: ShareGate – Tenant-to-Tenant Migration. When to assess it. When SharePoint and Teams have significant weight, when you want to take advantage of the migration to reorganize or clean content and, increasingly, when you want to reduce the number of tools used within the project.

BitTitan MigrationWiz

MigrationWiz is a SaaS platform with a long history in email and Microsoft 365 migrations. Its model is organized through different types of projects and licenses, which allows covering mailboxes, documents, Teams, SharePoint and, currently, Teams Private Chats under specific projects. Tenant Migration Bundle. BitTitan currently documents a Tenant Migration Bundle specifically aimed at Microsoft 365 tenant-to-tenant consolidations.

According to its current documentation, it includes coverage for workloads such as:

Teams Private Chat has changed in 2026. BitTitan updated its Teams Private Chat implementation during July 2026 to use current Microsoft import APIs. The current documentation establishes, among other aspects, a maximum attendance of 20 users for these works and specifies specific limitations such as certain mentions and invited users. This illustrates another important rule: Don’t budget for a migration based on what a tool did six months ago. In Teams, especially, changes are frequent.

When would you evaluate MigrationWiz. In projects where Exchange has a lot of weight, when looking for a SaaS platform based on well-documented projects or when the workloads adjust to the available bundles and project types. Official reference: BitTitan – Microsoft 365 Tenant Migrations.

Cloudiway

Cloudiway is another specialized platform that deserves evaluation in both Microsoft 365 tenant-to-tenant and cross-platform migrations. Its current documentation has specific guides for: mail, OneDrive, SharePoint, Microsoft Teams, Intune, and cross-tenant devices, in addition to different external origins. An advantage: variety of scenarios. Cloudiway can be especially interesting when the project is not exclusively Microsoft 365 → Microsoft 365 or when in addition to content there are devices or administration configurations that must be addressed.

When to evaluate it. In migrations with multiple types of content, cross-platform environments, Teams, Intune or devices, or when interested in comparing an alternative multiworkload platform to Quest. Official reference: Cloudiway – Official Migration Admin Guides.

Comparison of tools by workload

A useful table shouldn’t simply say which provider has a box checked. The important question is what type of project each option best solves.

This table should not be used as a contractual matrix of capabilities. It serves to guide the analysis. The exact support of each object must be verified against the current version of the tool before contracting it.

When migration lasts months, coexistence changes the decision

Two tools can migrate the exact same mailbox, and yet one will be much better suited for the project because the company needs to keep both tenants running simultaneously for three months. A phased migration may require: mail routing between tenants, free/busy, domain rewrite, Teams collaboration between organizations, synchronized identity and a strategy for users who have already migrated and users who have not yet.

In these projects the tool should not be evaluated only by what it copies, but by what it allows to keep operational while copying.

Migration fidelity matters more than a table with many checks

Two providers can indicate that they both migrate “Teams” and offer different results. The same thing happens in SharePoint, OneDrive and Exchange. You have to ask what exactly each functionality means. SharePoint. Don’t just ask if you migrate SharePoint. Question: Migrate versions? Metadata? Unique permissions? Sharing links? Lists? Content types? Term store? Sites connected to Teams? Apps? Teams. Don’t just ask if you migrate Teams. Ask for: standard channels, private channels, shared channels, posts, chats, Planner, tabs, apps, files, meeting chats, guests and attachments.

Exchange

Don’t just ask for messages. Check: Archive, calendar, contacts, rules, shared mailboxes, Full Access, Send As, delegations, meeting links and coexistence.

Permissions and security: a part of the comparison that should not be ignored

A migration tool needs to potentially access email, documents, chats, and other sensitive organizational information. Therefore, comparing only features and price is insufficient. We should also check:

Example: Quest and least privilege. Quest currently documents possibilities such as Sites.Selected to restrict certain SharePoint access and RBAC for Applications to reduce the scope of Exchange Online in supported scenarios. This type of detail may be more important to a regulated organization than a small difference in license prices.

How to Really Compare Tool Prices

Comparing only “price per user” can lead to wrong conclusions. The actual cost should be calculated as: migration license, necessary Microsoft licenses, coexistence, infrastructure, technical hours, support, double licensing duration.

A seemingly more expensive tool can end up reducing the total cost by eliminating many hours of scripting, troubleshooting and manual operation. The opposite can also happen: for a simple migration, purchasing a very extensive multiworkload platform may be unnecessary.

PowerShell: essential in many migrations, but not a complete migration tool

PowerShell is one of the most useful elements of a Microsoft 365 project, but its role should be explained well. PowerShell manages and automates Microsoft 365. It can also initiate some native migrations. But a script does not automatically become a tenant-to-tenant platform capable of migrating all workloads. Current modules that can intervene.

For new developments, it is preferable to avoid scripts based on the old AzureAD and MSOnline modules when there is an alternative supported by Microsoft Graph.

Example: Basic user inventory with Microsoft Graph

Install-Module Microsoft.Graph -Scope CurrentUser

Connect-MgGraph -Scopes "User.Read.All","Group.Read.All","Directory.Read.All"

Get-MgUser -All -Property Id,DisplayName,UserPrincipalName,Mail,AccountEnabled |
    Select-Object DisplayName,UserPrincipalName,Mail,AccountEnabled |
    Export-Csv "C:\Temp\usuarios-m365.csv" -NoTypeInformation -Encoding UTF8

Exchange Online Inventory

Install-Module ExchangeOnlineManagement -Scope CurrentUser

Connect-ExchangeOnline

Get-EXOMailbox -ResultSize Unlimited |
    Select-Object DisplayName,
                  UserPrincipalName,
                  PrimarySmtpAddress,
                  RecipientTypeDetails |
    Export-Csv "C:\Temp\buzones-m365.csv" -NoTypeInformation -Encoding UTF8

Shared mailboxes

Get-EXOMailbox -RecipientTypeDetails SharedMailbox -ResultSize Unlimited |
    Select-Object DisplayName,PrimarySmtpAddress |
    Export-Csv "C:\Temp\shared-mailboxes.csv" -NoTypeInformation -Encoding UTF8

Teams Inventory

Install-Module MicrosoftTeams -Scope CurrentUser

Connect-MicrosoftTeams

Get-Team |
    Select-Object DisplayName,GroupId,Visibility,MailNickName,Archived |
    Export-Csv "C:\Temp\teams.csv" -NoTypeInformation -Encoding UTF8

Channel Inventory

$Teams = Get-Team

$Channels = foreach ($Team in $Teams) {

    Get-TeamChannel -GroupId $Team.GroupId | ForEach-Object {

        [PSCustomObject]@{
            TeamName       = $Team.DisplayName
            GroupId        = $Team.GroupId
            ChannelName    = $_.DisplayName
            MembershipType = $_.MembershipType
        }
    }
}

$Channels |
    Export-Csv "C:\Temp\teams-canales.csv" -NoTypeInformation -Encoding UTF8

These examples are from inventory. Before running automations that create, change, or delete objects in production, they must be tested in a controlled environment and adapted to the tenant.

Microsoft Graph: the API behind more and more migrations

Microsoft Graph is increasingly important in migration projects. It is not only used to inventory users and groups. Microsoft publishes specific APIs that allow tools and developers to work with certain migration scenarios, including tenant-to-tenant capabilities and import APIs for Microsoft Teams. This explains why some previously impossible features—such as certain chat history scenarios—are now appearing in both Microsoft and third-party tools.

However, using Graph directly means also assuming: development, permissions, authentication, error management, throttling, logging, retries, monitoring and validation. Building a solution internally may make sense for a very specific or repetitive need. For a complex one-time migration, it often does not pay to replicate the functions of an already developed platform.

SharePoint Migration Tool: useful, but for another type of migration

SharePoint Migration Tool (SPMT) is a free tool from Microsoft designed primarily for moving content from SharePoint Server to Microsoft 365. Microsoft currently documents support for versions such as SharePoint Server 2010, 2013, 2016, and 2019, as well as certain workflows. You can migrate to SharePoint, OneDrive, or Teams-related locations. But that doesn’t make it a complete solution for: Tenant A Microsoft 365 → Tenant B Microsoft 365.

It does not solve Exchange, identities, domain, chats, applications or a multi-workload Microsoft 365 migration on its own. Official reference: Microsoft – SharePoint Migration Tool.

Migration Manager: very useful for external migrations to Microsoft 365

Migration Manager It is located in the SharePoint Admin Center and is designed to manage and monitor content migrations to Microsoft 365. In file sharing scenarios it uses agents deployed on servers or virtual machines and allows you to distribute migration tasks between them. Microsoft has also expanded Migration Manager for different external sources.

This last distinction is important because Migration Manager and Migration Orchestrator are not the same. Official reference: Microsoft – Migration Manager.

Robocopy: useful for local files, not for migrating Microsoft 365

Robocopy It’s still a great Windows tool for copying large amounts of data between file paths. It can be useful before a cloud migration if we need to consolidate several file shares or move data from an old server to a staging server.

Simple example

robocopy "D:\DatosOrigen" "\\ServidorDestino\Datos" /E /COPY:DAT /R:2 /W:5 /LOG:"C:\Temp\robocopy.log"

But copying a file is not equivalent to migrating a Microsoft 365 object.

A project that tries to solve SharePoint or OneDrive tenant-to-tenant by downloading files and copying them with Robocopy typically loses much of the information that makes those services more than just a folder system.

Can several tools be combined in the same migration?

Yes, and in some projects it is exactly the right thing to do. An architecture could use:

That doesn’t mean we should use many tools by default. Each new platform adds: licenses, permissions, knowledge, logs, support and coordination. If a single tool correctly covers the entire scope, it is usually easier to operate the project from a single console. The danger of fragmented migration. If each workload is treated independently without a common architecture, sequencing errors can occur.

For example, migrating Teams before you have properly prepared users, SharePoint, and OneDrive can affect permissions, files, or chats. The tools can be combined, but the architecture must remain one.

A practical method for choosing tools

Instead of starting by comparing brands, we can evaluate each project using seven questions. 1. What workloads really exist? The first filter is inventory.

With this information we can now rule out or prioritize many options. 2. What loyalty does the customer need? Do you just want the documents or do you need versions, metadata, sharing, conversations, Planner and permissions? The more fidelity is required, the more important it is to analyze each workload in depth. 3. Do we need premigration and deltas? This question may immediately rule out certain native one-and-done methods. In an organization with high SharePoint volumes and low cutover time, the ability to do multiple passes can be critical.

4. How long will coexistence last? An overnight migration and a six-month separation do not require the same technology. 5. Is there identity or devices in scope? If, in addition to Microsoft 365, we must migrate Active Directory, Entra-joined devices or Intune, the set of alternatives changes significantly. 6. What level of automation and reporting do we need? A company with 20 users can successfully manage several scripts and control sheets.

A migration of 5,000 users probably requires another scale of reporting and operation. 7. Who will maintain the tool during the project? The ease of business of a SaaS console does not mean that the tool can be operated without experience. You must know the permissions, errors, throttling, mappings, retries and validations of each workload.

The pilot must confirm—or change—the tool choice

A theoretical evaluation can say that a tool meets the scope. The pilot demonstrates how it really accomplishes this. The pilot should include sufficiently varied cases:

If the pilot shows that a critical function does not behave as expected, there is still time to modify the architecture.

Common mistakes when choosing a migration tool

Checklist before hiring migration licenses

Frequently asked questions about tools to migrate Microsoft 365 tenants

Does a tenant-to-tenant tool always cover all of Microsoft 365?

It should not be interpreted that way. Each solution has a scope that must be checked for workload and property. Mail, files, conversations, apps, and permissions may have different requirements or treatments. The proposal must explain what is available at the destination and what needs adaptation, reconstruction or retention by another procedure.

Does it make sense to combine several tools?

It can make sense if they address different needs and the sequence is tested. It is necessary to define which objects each one creates or modifies and avoid overlapping actions without control. The combination is validated during the pilot, including error investigation and update operations supported by each method.

How is the real cost of a tool calculated?

In addition to licensing, preparation, execution, correction, validation, and manual tasks that are outside of your scope are considered. The pilot allows this effort to be estimated with a realistic sample. Comparing only the price per user can hide important differences in the result delivered and the work maintained by the internal team.

What should be documented when choosing a solution?

Record the scope, requirements, accepted limitations, pilot results and operating procedure. Identify who owns incident resolution and reporting as well. This documentation allows us to verify that the chosen tool responds to the specific project and explains why other alternatives did not achieve the same result.

Final recommendations: first decide how the new tenant should look and then choose the tool

The tool market for Microsoft 365 tenant-to-tenant migrations has changed a lot. Microsoft already has Migration Orchestrator and specific solutions for Exchange, OneDrive and SharePoint. Quest continues to offer a very broad platform for Microsoft 365, identity and devices. ShareGate has evolved from its traditional strength in SharePoint and Teams to a more complete tenant-to-tenant proposition. BitTitan continues to develop MigrationWiz and has recently renewed its private chat migration. Cloudiway maintains extensive coverage across Microsoft 365, cross-platform, Intune, and devices.

PowerShell and Microsoft Graph remain critical, but primarily serve the role of automation, preparation, and control. SPMT and Migration Manager solve other ingestion scenarios towards Microsoft 365. Robocopy is still an excellent tool for local files, but should not be confused with a cloud migration. Therefore, simply ask “which tool is better?” offers little information. The useful question is: What combination of technology allows us to take this specific environment from its current state to the desired target tenant, preserving important data and relationships and maintaining an acceptable level of risk?

The answer begins with an assessment, continues with a technical comparison and should be confirmed with a pilot before mass migration.

Recommended official documentation

Microsoft – tenant-to-tenant migrations.

• Microsoft – Microsoft 365 Migration Overview
• Microsoft – Plan a Microsoft 365 Tenant-to-Tenant Migration
• Microsoft – Migration Orchestrator Overview
• Microsoft – Running a Migration with Migration Orchestrator

Microsoft – Exchange, OneDrive and SharePoint.

• Microsoft – Cross-Tenant Mailbox Migration
• Microsoft – Cross-Tenant OneDrive Migration
• Microsoft – Cross-Tenant SharePoint Migration

Microsoft – Migration Manager and SPMT.

• Microsoft – SharePoint Migration Tool
• Microsoft – Migration Manager
• Microsoft – How Migration Manager Works

PowerShell and Microsoft Graph.

• Microsoft – Microsoft Graph PowerShell Overview
• Microsoft – Connect-ExchangeOnline
• Microsoft – Teams PowerShell Overview

Quest On Demand Migration.

• Quest – On Demand Migration
• Quest – On Demand Migration User Guide
• Quest – On Demand Migration Release Notes

ShareGate.

• ShareGate – Tenant-to-Tenant Migration
• ShareGate – Microsoft Teams Migration
• ShareGate – Migrate Release Notes

BitTitan MigrationWiz.

• BitTitan – Microsoft 365 Tenant Migrations
• BitTitan – MigrationWiz Licensing and Migration Types
• BitTitan – Teams Private Chat Migration

Cloudiway.

• Cloudiway – Official Migration Admin Guides
• Cloudiway – Microsoft 365 Tenant-to-Tenant Migration