Keycloak vs Pocket ID
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?
Keycloak
Open-source identity and access management for modern apps
VS
Pocket ID
Simple OIDC provider that uses only passkeys
| Feature | Keycloak | Pocket ID |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Identity & SSO | Identity & SSO |
| License | Apache-2.0 | BSD-2-Clause |
| Language | Java | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Easy |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 128 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | docker |
| GitHub stars | ★ 36,058 | ★ 8,737 |
| First released | 2014 | 2024 |
| Replaces | Okta, Auth0, Microsoft Entra ID | Auth0, Authelia |
Why pick each one
Choose Pocket ID if…
- Released under the BSD-2-Clause license
- Easy to set up — beginner-friendly
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Mature project with 8.7k GitHub stars
Frequently asked questions
Is Keycloak or Pocket ID better?
Neither is universally better. Keycloak has the larger community, while Pocket ID is simpler to set up (easy difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Keycloak and Pocket ID free and open-source?
Yes. Keycloak is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Pocket ID under BSD-2-Clause. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Keycloak and Pocket ID with Docker?
Keycloak: yes. Pocket ID: yes.