--- source_url: "https://use-apify.com/blog/authentik-vs-keycloak-2026" title: "Authentik vs Keycloak: Choosing a Self-Hosted Identity Provider (2026) | Use Apify" mirrored_at: 2026-08-21T01:00:59.284Z host: use-apify.com cited_in_42a: true mirror_canonical: "https://index.42a.ai/use-apify.com/blog/authentik-vs-keycloak-2026" --- > **Original source:** https://use-apify.com/blog/authentik-vs-keycloak-2026 Both Authentik and Keycloak provide enterprise-grade single sign-on, OIDC, SAML, and MFA for self-hosted application stacks. Both are serious identity providers — not lightweight utilities. The difference is philosophy: Authentik is built for modern DevOps teams who want something that works out of the box; Keycloak is the battle-tested choice for enterprise environments that need maximum protocol coverage and production history going back a decade. ## TL;DR comparison[​](#tldr-comparison "Direct link to TL;DR comparison") Dimension Authentik Keycloak License MIT (core) + Enterprise edition Apache-2.0 Backed by Authentik Security (commercial) Red Hat / IBM Language / runtime Python + Go Java (Quarkus) Idle RAM ~600 MB ~1.5 GB Setup complexity Moderate (clean Docker Compose) High (realm/client model, steep learning curve) OIDC Yes Yes SAML 2.0 Yes Yes LDAP Yes (provider and source) Yes (user federation) Passkeys Yes (native) Yes (Keycloak 22+, via WebAuthn) Social login Yes (30+ providers) Yes (via social identity providers) UI style Modern, clean Functional, dense Production deployments Growing fast Massive (decades of enterprise use) Minimum Liquid Web VPS 2 GB 4 GB Winner RAM, ease of setup, modern UI Battle-tested history, enterprise support, community size ## Setup complexity[​](#setup-complexity "Direct link to Setup complexity") **Authentik** ships a Docker Compose file with four services: a PostgreSQL database, Redis, the Authentik server, and a background worker. Initial setup — creating an admin account, configuring your first application provider (OIDC or SAML), and connecting Coolify or Outline — takes about 30–45 minutes for a developer who has not used Authentik before. The flow creation UI (for enrollment, password recovery, and MFA) uses a visual pipeline builder that is intuitive once you understand that flows are sequences of stages. **Keycloak** uses a realm/client model that has more moving parts. A realm is an isolated namespace for users and applications; a client is an application registered within that realm. The admin UI exposes dozens of configuration panels per client: mapper configurations, protocol settings, client scopes, fine-grained permissions. For a developer configuring Keycloak for the first time, plan 2–4 hours to get a basic OIDC integration working correctly. The model is powerful — it is also genuinely complex. **Winner: Authentik.** Faster to first working SSO integration. Keycloak's complexity is justified for organizations with complex protocol requirements; it is overhead for teams that need basic SSO. ## RAM footprint[​](#ram-footprint "Direct link to RAM footprint") Measured idle on fresh Docker Compose deployments with no active sessions: Tool Idle RAM Authentik (server + worker + PostgreSQL + Redis) ~600 MB Keycloak (single node + PostgreSQL) ~1.5 GB Keycloak's Java runtime (Quarkus) accounts for most of the footprint. JVM startup is also slower than Authentik's Python/Go stack — Keycloak takes 60–90 seconds to reach healthy status after `docker compose up`. **Winner: Authentik.** 2.5× lighter at idle. On a 2 GB VPS, Authentik leaves room for other services; Keycloak on a 2 GB VPS will be memory-constrained. ## Protocol and feature coverage[​](#protocol-and-feature-coverage "Direct link to Protocol and feature coverage") Both tools cover the protocols that matter for most self-hosted stacks: Protocol Authentik Keycloak OIDC / OAuth 2.0 Yes Yes SAML 2.0 Yes Yes LDAP (source) Yes Yes (user federation) LDAP (provider) Yes Yes SCIM Yes (v2023.6+) Yes (Keycloak 24+) WebAuthn / Passkeys Yes (native, first-class) Yes (Keycloak 22+) Social login Yes (30+ built-in) Yes (requires IdP configuration) RADIUS Yes (enterprise only) Via third-party extension Keycloak's advantage is protocol depth in edge cases: fine-grained authorization services, token exchange, client-initiated backchannel authentication (CIBA), and the ability to implement highly custom claim mappers via Java SPI extensions. These are enterprise requirements that most self-hosters never encounter. Authentik's advantage is developer ergonomics: passkeys work without configuration gymnastics, social login providers require minimal setup, and the outpost system (for forward auth with Nginx, Traefik, or Caddy) is straightforward. ## Backing and long-term risk[​](#backing-and-long-term-risk "Direct link to Backing and long-term risk") **Authentik** is developed by Authentik Security, a commercial company that offers an enterprise edition with additional features (RADIUS, premium support, SCIM provisioning). The MIT-licensed core covers the needs of most self-hosters. The company's commercial model provides funding stability without requiring users to purchase a license. **Keycloak** is backed by Red Hat (IBM). It has been in production in enterprise environments for over a decade, powers identity for major financial institutions and governments, and has a large global community of contributors. Red Hat's commercial JBoss SSO is built on Keycloak. The production history and enterprise pedigree are Keycloak's strongest arguments. **Risk assessment:** Authentik is newer and has less production history. Keycloak's risk is complexity and Java's operational weight — not project longevity. ## Which should you choose?[​](#which-should-you-choose "Direct link to Which should you choose?") **Choose Authentik if:** - You are configuring SSO for the first time and want a faster path to working integrations - RAM is a constraint (2 GB VPS, shared infrastructure) - You want native passkey support without additional configuration - Your stack is modern (Coolify, Outline, Gitea, Plane, Nextcloud) and you want a clean integration story - A modern UI and active community are priorities **Choose Keycloak if:** - Your organization requires battle-tested identity infrastructure with enterprise support options - You need advanced protocol features (CIBA, fine-grained authorization, custom Java SPI extensions) - Existing enterprise tooling expects Keycloak (Red Hat ecosystem, specific SAML configurations) - Long production history in regulated industries matters to your security team - You have the operational capacity to manage a Java/JVM service Authentik has a setup guide on this site: - [Self-Host Authentik](https://use-apify.com/docs/self-hosted/identity/authentik) There is no automated migration tool. Both platforms support LDAP as a user source, so if your users are in an LDAP/Active Directory, both can connect to the same directory. For local users, migration requires a manual export from Keycloak (user data via REST API) and import into Authentik via its API. Application registrations (OIDC clients, SAML providers) must be recreated. Plan for a careful cutover, application by application, with parallel operation during transition. Yes. The core Authentik installation is MIT-licensed — you can use it in commercial environments without purchasing a license. The Enterprise edition (paid) adds RADIUS support, dedicated support SLAs, and a few compliance features. For most self-hosted stacks — SSO, MFA, OIDC/SAML for internal tools — the MIT core covers everything you need at no cost. Both Authentik and Keycloak work with any OIDC-compatible application, which includes Coolify, Outline, Plane, and most modern self-hosted tools. In practice, Authentik is more commonly documented in community guides for these specific apps — the forward auth flow (used by Traefik and Caddy integrations) is more straightforward in Authentik's outpost model. Keycloak works equally well but requires more client configuration steps.