authentik vs Bitwarden
authentik, Bitwarden compared on license, free-edition limits, deployment and project health. Change a project below to compare something else.
| authentik | Bitwarden | |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Security | Security |
| License | MIT LicenseOpen source (OSI) | GNU Affero General Public License v3.0Open source (OSI) |
| Free edition | Some features paywalled | Some features paywalled |
| Deployment | Self-hosted | Self-hosted · Cloud |
| Self-hosting setup | Needs a database | Needs a database |
| SSO / SAML | Free | Paid |
| Role-based access control | Not confirmed | Not confirmed |
| Audit logs | Not confirmed | Paid |
| Multi-user / teams | Not confirmed | Not confirmed |
| Backups and restore | Not confirmed | Not confirmed |
| API access | Free | Not confirmed |
| Support SLA | Paid | Paid |
| GitHub stars | 26k | 20k |
| Last release | Sep 17, 2026 | Sep 30, 2026 |
| Alternative to | Auth0, Okta | 1Password, LastPass |
In short
- authentik is licensed MIT License (open source (osi)). Free edition: some features paywalled.
- Bitwarden is licensed GNU Affero General Public License v3.0 (open source (osi)). Free edition: some features paywalled.
Each project page lists the official sources behind these answers. Where the official pages do not say, the table shows “Not confirmed”.