Learn how VoidAuth 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
12 hours agoRepository age
2 yearsVersion
v1.17.0License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
voidauth/voidauth
Last 30 days
Last commit
3 days agoRepository age
7 yearsVersion
v4.20.0License
AGPL-3.0Self-hosted
YesRepository
zitadel/zitadel
Zitadel appears to have several advantages over VoidAuth, particularly in popularity, growth and maturity. Consider your specific needs regarding popularity, growth, activity, maturity, licensing and features when making your decision.
Zitadel significantly outpaces VoidAuth in community adoption with 15,437 stars compared to 2,892 stars on GitHub. This 5.3x difference suggests Zitadel has a much larger and more active community. In terms of developer contributions, Zitadel has 1,401 forks, indicating strong developer engagement.
Zitadel is growing faster, adding 326 stars in the last 30 days (+2.2%) against adding 49 stars for VoidAuth (+1.7%). Zitadel is both larger and pulling further ahead.
Both projects show recent activity, with VoidAuth last updated 12 hours ago and Zitadel 3 days ago.
Zitadel has been in development longer, starting 7 years ago, compared to VoidAuth which began 2 years ago. This 5.2-year head start suggests Zitadel may have more mature features and established processes.
Both projects use the AGPL-3.0 license, providing identical terms for usage and distribution.
Both tools serve similar use cases in Authentication & SSO. However, they also have distinct specializations: Zitadel extends into Authorization & Permissions.
Both VoidAuth 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