Learn how Keycloak and Pocket ID 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

Both Keycloak and Pocket ID have their unique strengths and serve similar purposes effectively. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Keycloak significantly outpaces Pocket ID in community adoption with 36,426 stars compared to 9,028 stars on GitHub. This 4.0x difference suggests Keycloak has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Keycloak has 8,852 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Pocket ID is growing faster, adding 238 stars in the last 30 days (+2.7%) against adding 570 stars for Keycloak (+1.6%). Pocket ID is the smaller project of the two, so it is closing the gap rather than extending a lead.
Both projects show recent activity, with Keycloak last updated 12 hours ago and Pocket ID 21 hours ago.
Keycloak has been in development longer, starting 13 years ago, compared to Pocket ID which began 2 years ago. This 11.3-year head start suggests Keycloak may have more mature features and established processes.
Pocket ID uses the BSD-2-Clause license, which is more permissive than Keycloak's Apache-2.0 license, potentially offering greater flexibility for commercial use and integration.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Authentication & SSO. However, they also have distinct specializations: Keycloak also focuses on Authorization & Permissions.
Both Keycloak and Pocket ID 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