Keycloak vs Auth0: Complete Comparison Guide
Compare Keycloak and Auth0 on identity management, self-hosting, enterprise SSO, and cost. Discover whether an open-source or managed solution is better for your organization.
Keycloak
An open-source Identity and Access Management (IAM) solution sponsored by Red Hat. Keycloak offers full support for SAML 2.0, OpenID Connect, and OAuth 2.0, identity federation, user federation via LDAP/Active Directory, and a powerful admin console. The platform is fully self-hostable and widely deployed in enterprise environments requiring complete control over their identity infrastructure.
Auth0
A fully managed authentication and authorization platform by Okta. Auth0 provides quick setup, extensive SDK support for dozens of programming languages and frameworks, enterprise SSO, and a marketplace with thousands of integrations. The platform combines ease of use with enterprise-grade security and is available through a usage-based pricing model.
Comparison table
| Feature | Keycloak | Auth0 |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting | Self-hosted — full control over infrastructure and data | Fully managed SaaS — no infrastructure management needed |
| Protocols | SAML 2.0, OpenID Connect, OAuth 2.0, LDAP, Kerberos | OpenID Connect, OAuth 2.0, SAML (enterprise plan) |
| Identity federation | Extensive federation with external IdPs, LDAP/AD user federation | Social login, enterprise SSO via SAML/OIDC connections |
| Customization | Fully customizable themes, SPI extensions, custom providers | Actions/Rules for logic, limited UI customization via Universal Login |
| Operations | Requires DevOps expertise: patching, scaling, monitoring, backups | Zero maintenance — Auth0 manages everything including SLA guarantees |
| Cost | Free (open-source) but operational costs for hosting and management | Free up to 25,000 MAU, then enterprise pricing that can scale quickly |
Verdict
The choice between Keycloak and Auth0 fundamentally comes down to control versus convenience. Keycloak gives you full control over your identity infrastructure — essential for organizations with strict compliance or data sovereignty requirements. However, the operational overhead is significant: you need DevOps expertise for deployment, scaling, and maintenance. Auth0 eliminates this complexity entirely and offers a polished developer experience with extensive SDK support. Auth0 costs can increase considerably at scale, while Keycloak remains free as open-source software.
Our recommendation
At MG Software, we typically choose managed authentication solutions like Clerk or Auth0, as the operational overhead of self-hosted Keycloak rarely outweighs the benefits for our typical clients. For enterprise clients in regulated sectors (government, healthcare, finance), we recommend Keycloak with a robust Kubernetes deployment. In those cases, we assist with initial setup, high-availability configuration, and monitor the identity infrastructure as part of our management contract.
Frequently asked questions
Related articles
Auth0 vs Clerk: Complete Comparison Guide
Compare Auth0 and Clerk on authentication, developer experience, UI components, and enterprise features. Discover which auth platform best fits your web application.
NextAuth vs Clerk: Complete Comparison Guide
Compare NextAuth (Auth.js) and Clerk on Next.js integration, user management, pricing, and flexibility. Discover which authentication solution best fits your Next.js project.
What is GDPR? - Definition & Meaning
Learn what GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) is, what obligations it imposes on businesses, and how to make your software GDPR-compliant.
What is OAuth? - Definition & Meaning
Learn what OAuth is, how this authorization protocol works, and why OAuth is the standard for secure access to APIs and third-party applications.