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 30 days
Last commit
1 day agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
v4.20.0License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
zitadel/zitadel
Both Authentik and Zitadel have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Authentik leads in popularity with 26,183 stars vs 15,484 stars for Zitadel. The 69% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Authentik has 2,096 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Zitadel is growing faster, adding 335 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 377 stars for Authentik (+1.5%). Zitadel is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Authentik last updated 11 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