Learn how Keycloak 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

Both Keycloak 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.
Keycloak leads in popularity with 36,518 stars vs 14,915 stars for Zitadel. The 145% higher star count indicates stronger community adoption. In terms of developer contributions, Keycloak has 8,873 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Zitadel is growing faster, adding 305 stars in the last 30 days (+2.1%) against adding 579 stars for Keycloak (+1.6%). 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 Keycloak last updated 5 hours ago and Zitadel 6 hours ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: Keycloak uses Python, C, Java while Zitadel leverages Next.js, SCSS, Golang, Lua.
Keycloak has been in development longer, starting 13 years ago, compared to Zitadel which began 6 years ago. This 6.8-year head start suggests Keycloak may have more mature features and established processes.
The projects use different licenses: Keycloak is licensed under Apache-2.0 while Zitadel uses AGPL-3.0. Consider the licensing requirements when choosing for your project.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Authentication & SSO, Authorization & Permissions.
Both Keycloak 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