Learn how Authentik and Zitadel differ in their key features, development activity, technology stack and community adoption, so you can decide which of these authentication & sso providers is best for you.
Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Last 30 days
Last commit
Repository age
Version
License
Self-hosted
Repository

Authentik appears to have several advantages over Zitadel, particularly in popularity and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Authentik leads in popularity with 25,904 stars vs 15,270 stars for Zitadel. The 70% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Authentik has 2,063 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Authentik and Zitadel are moving at much the same rate, adding 483 stars and adding 283 stars respectively over the last 30 days (+1.9% vs +1.9%). Neither is pulling away from the other on momentum alone.
Both projects show recent activity, with Authentik last updated 7 hours ago and Zitadel 1 day ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX, Golang. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Authentik uses Python, Rust, Django while Zitadel leverages Next.js, SCSS, Lua.
Both projects started around the same time, with Authentik beginning 7 years ago and Zitadel 7 years ago.
Authentik uses the MIT license, which is more permissive than Zitadel's AGPL-3.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Authentication & SSO, Authorization & Permissions.
Both Authentik and Zitadel offer self-hosting capabilities, giving you full control over your data and infrastructure.
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs
vs