Authentik vs Zitadel: which one to choose in 2026?
Both are open source alternatives to Auth0, Okta. We compare license, tech stack and features to help you decide which fits your team best.
| Authentik | Zitadel | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Auth & Identity | Auth & Identity |
| License | MIT | AGPL-3.0 (con excepciones Apache-2.0/MIT en algunos directorios) |
| GitHub stars | ~25.3k | ~14.9k |
| Tech stack | Python, Go, PostgreSQL | Go, PostgreSQL |
| Replaces | Okta, Auth0 | Auth0, Okta |
Authentik has more GitHub stars, which usually indicates a larger community (not necessarily that it's the best option for your use case).
Authentik
Flexible identity platform, a modern alternative to Okta/Auth0.
Pros
- Visual authentication flow editor and an application proxy with no code changes
Things to consider
- Requires Postgres and Redis in addition to the server itself
Zitadel
All-in-one multi-tenant identity, an alternative to Auth0/Okta.
Pros
- Built from the ground up for multi-tenant SaaS
Things to consider
- Documentation is thinner than Keycloak's for advanced cases
- AGPL-3.0: a strong copyleft license, with source-sharing obligations for covered modified versions and certain network use, under its terms
Key features
Authentik
- Visual authentication flow editor
- Application proxy with no code changes
- MFA and conditional access policies
Zitadel
- Native multi-tenancy (organizations)
- SSO, MFA and per-org project management
- Full gRPC and REST APIs
Already know which one you prefer?
Add it to your Stack Builder and generate a ready-to-deploy docker-compose.yml alongside the rest of your stack.
Go to Stack Builder