Keycloak vs Topaz
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
Topaz
Open-source authorization with fine-grained access control
| Feature | Keycloak | Topaz |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Identity & SSO | Identity & SSO |
| License | Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 |
| Language | Java | Go |
| Setup difficulty | Hard | Medium |
| Min. RAM | 1,024 MB | 256 MB |
| Deployment | docker, kubernetes, bare-metal | docker, binary |
| GitHub stars | ★ 36,058 | ★ 1,355 |
| First released | 2014 | 2022 |
| Replaces | Okta, Auth0, Microsoft Entra ID | Auth0 FGA |
Why pick each one
Choose Topaz if…
- Released under the Apache-2.0 license
- First-class Docker support for quick deployment
- Active community (1.4k GitHub stars)
- Written in Go
Frequently asked questions
Is Keycloak or Topaz better?
Neither is universally better. Keycloak has the larger community, while Topaz is simpler to set up (medium difficulty). Choose based on the comparison table above and your own setup.
Are Keycloak and Topaz free and open-source?
Yes. Keycloak is licensed under Apache-2.0 and Topaz under Apache-2.0. Both can be self-hosted at no software cost.
Can I run Keycloak and Topaz with Docker?
Keycloak: yes. Topaz: yes.