Keycloak vs node-oidc-provider

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?
FeatureKeycloaknode-oidc-provider
CategoryIdentity & SSOIdentity & SSO
LicenseApache-2.0MIT
LanguageJavaJavaScript
Setup difficultyHardHard
Min. RAM1,024 MB256 MB
Deploymentdocker, kubernetes, bare-metalsource, docker
GitHub stars★ 36,058★ 3,788
First released20142016
ReplacesOkta, Auth0, Microsoft Entra IDAuth0, Okta

Why pick each one

Choose Keycloak if…

  • Mature and battle-tested
  • Strong enterprise feature set
Keycloak details

Choose node-oidc-provider if…

  • Released under the MIT license
  • First-class Docker support for quick deployment
  • Active community (3.8k GitHub stars)
  • Written in JavaScript
node-oidc-provider details

Frequently asked questions

Is Keycloak or node-oidc-provider better?

Neither is universally better. Keycloak has the larger community; both share a hard setup difficulty, so the decision comes down to features and licensing.

Are Keycloak and node-oidc-provider free and open-source?

Yes. Keycloak is licensed under Apache-2.0 and node-oidc-provider under MIT. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.

Can I run Keycloak and node-oidc-provider with Docker?

Keycloak: yes. node-oidc-provider: yes.

Related comparisons