Keycloak vs Vaultwarden
Is it time to switch? We break down the differences so you can stop bleeding money.
Choose Vaultwarden.
If you want to own your data, save money, and avoid vendor lock-in, Vaultwarden is more popular among developers.
What Actually Matters
No fluff — just the differences that affect your decision
Both open source, different licenses: Keycloak uses Apache-2.0, Vaultwarden uses AGPL-3.0. Check the fine print if you're building commercial.
Both can run on your own metal with Docker. Full data ownership, no cloud dependency. We have deploy guides for each.
Vaultwarden leads at 69.0k stars vs 37.3k, but both have solid communities. You won't be alone with either choice.
Keycloak is built in Java, Vaultwarden in Rust. Matters if you want to contribute, extend, or debug internals.
Try both — most offer free tiers. The right pick depends on your stack size, team, and tolerance for DevOps.
Keycloak
Open source identity and access management for modern applications and services.
Why Choose Keycloak
- ✓Enterprise-standard identity provider supporting SAML and OIDC
- ✓Federated identity with social login and LDAP integration
- ✓Battle-tested by Red Hat in production environments
Drawbacks
- ×UI can be clunky
- ×Heavy resource usage
Vaultwarden
Unofficial Bitwarden compatible server written in Rust, formerly known as bitwarden_rs.
Why Choose Vaultwarden
- ✓Full Bitwarden API compatibility in a lightweight Rust binary
- ✓Runs on 50MB of RAM — perfect for Raspberry Pi or small VPS
- ✓Supports organizations, attachments, and Bitwarden Send
Drawbacks
- ×Third-party implementation (not security audited officially)
Related Comparisons
Explore alternatives for other tools in Security
