Learn how SuperTokens 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
3 days agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
v12.4.1Self-hosted
YesRepository
supertokens-core
Last 30 days
Last commit
1 day agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
v4.20.0License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
zitadel/zitadel
Zitadel appears to have several advantages over SuperTokens, particularly in growth and licensing. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, technology, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Both SuperTokens and Zitadel show comparable community engagement with 15,339 and 15,484 stars respectively. In terms of developer contributions, Zitadel has 1,411 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Zitadel is growing faster, adding 335 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 11 stars for SuperTokens (+0.1%). Zitadel is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with SuperTokens last updated 3 days ago and Zitadel 1 day ago.
Both tools share common technology foundations, being built with JavaScript, CSS, Bash, Typescript, JSX. However, they differ in their additional technology choices: SuperTokens uses Python, Java while Zitadel leverages Next.js, Golang, SCSS, Lua.
Both projects started around the same time, with SuperTokens beginning 7 years ago and Zitadel 7 years ago.
Zitadel is licensed under AGPL-3.0, while SuperTokens's license terms are not publicly specified.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Authentication & SSO. However, they also have distinct specializations: Zitadel extends into Authorization & Permissions.
Both SuperTokens 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