Boundary vs ZITADEL
A side-by-side comparison of two self-hosted identity & sso options — licensing, setup difficulty, resource needs, and what each one replaces.
Not the right match-up?
Boundary
Identity-based secure access to systems and services
VS
ZITADEL
Cloud-native identity infrastructure with multi-tenancy built in
| Feature | Boundary | ZITADEL |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Identity & SSO | Identity & SSO |
| License | BUSL-1.1 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Go | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Medium | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 512 MB | 512 MB |
| Deployment | docker, binary | docker, kubernetes, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 4,055 | ★ 14,671 |
| First released | 2020 | 2020 |
| Replaces | Teleport, StrongDM | Auth0, Okta, Firebase Auth |
Why pick each one
Choose Boundary if…
- Released under the BUSL-1.1 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (4.1k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is Boundary or ZITADEL better?
Neither is universally better. ZITADEL has the larger community; both share a medium setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.
Are Boundary and ZITADEL free and open-source?
Yes. Boundary is licensed under BUSL-1.1 and ZITADEL under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Boundary and ZITADEL with Docker?
Boundary: yes. ZITADEL: yes.