Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

authentik vs Teleport

authentik logo

authentik

Cybersecurity

Open-source identity provider with flexible authentication flows

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Teleport logo

Teleport

Cybersecurity

Certificate-based access to servers, Kubernetes, databases and apps, replacing shared credentials and VPNs

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only authentik has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: authentik smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides; Teleport pricing is not published and is described as active users plus protected resources, so an autoscaling estate cannot forecast the bill and finance teams discover the true cost only after the first true-up.
  • They diverge on capability: authentik covers Configurable flows, Teleport covers Short-lived certificates.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which authentik and Teleport actually diverge.

Attributes where authentik and Teleport differ
AttributeauthentikTeleport
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen-source core with a paid enterprise tierquote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedLinux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in authentik

  • Configurable flows
  • Protocol support
  • Application proxy
  • Modern admin interface

Only in Teleport

  • Short-lived certificates
  • Protocol coverage
  • Session recording and replay
  • Access Requests
  • Device Trust
  • Identity provider integration
  • Machine identity
  • FIPS and FedRAMP builds

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

authentik

  • Self-hosted SSO across internal services without commercial identity pricingnot Teleport
  • Putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxynot Teleport
  • Teams who tried Keycloak and wanted something less heavynot Teleport

Teleport

  • Removing long-lived SSH keys and shared database passwords so that offboarding an engineer takes one action in the identity providernot authentik
  • Producing session recordings and per-user database audit trails as direct evidence for SOC 2 or FedRAMPnot authentik
  • Giving contractors or on-call engineers time-boxed, approved access to production instead of standing admin rightsnot authentik
  • Replacing a flat VPN with per-resource authorisation across servers, Kubernetes and internal web appsnot authentik

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

authentik

  • Smaller project than Keycloak, with a correspondingly smaller community and fewer integration guides
  • The flow model is flexible but conceptually unfamiliar, and simple setups can feel over-abstracted
  • Enterprise support and some governance features sit behind the paid tier
  • Self-hosted identity is still yours to secure, patch and keep available

Teleport

  • Pricing is not published and is described as active users plus protected resources, so an autoscaling estate cannot forecast the bill and finance teams discover the true cost only after the first true-up.
  • The proxy is a hard dependency on reaching production, so it needs its own high availability deployment and a tested break-glass path or an outage in Teleport becomes an outage in your ability to respond to outages.
  • The open source Community Edition omits Access Requests, Device Trust and the FIPS builds, which are exactly the controls an auditor asks about, so the free tier rarely survives a compliance review.
  • Self-hosting means running and upgrading a certificate authority and its backing store, and Teleport releases frequently enough that upgrade work becomes a standing operational commitment.
  • Coverage across protocols is uneven in depth, so teams with legacy systems, unusual databases or bespoke network appliances find gaps that still require the old VPN to remain in place alongside it.

Pricing, plan by plan

authentik

Free
  • Open sourceFree
    • Full identity provider
    • All protocols
    • Community support

Teleport

On request
  • Teleport Community Edition$undefined/year
    • Open source, self-hosted
    • SSH, Kubernetes, database and app access
    • Session recording
  • Teleport Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Cloud-hosted or self-hosted
    • Access Requests and approval workflow
    • Device Trust and hardware key enforcement

Which should you pick?

Choose authentik if

  • You need configurable flows.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted.
  • You also want protocol support.
authentik review

Choose Teleport if

  • You need short-lived certificates.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want protocol coverage.
Teleport review

Questions people ask

Is authentik or Teleport better?
Neither clearly leads. authentik starts at Free and Teleport at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, authentik or Teleport?
authentik has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for authentik and On request for Teleport.
Does authentik or Teleport run on more platforms?
authentik runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Teleport runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes, Cloud.
Can I use authentik for free?
Yes. authentik has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Teleport starts at On request.
What is authentik best used for?
authentik is most often used for self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing, putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy, teams who tried keycloak and wanted something less heavy. Of those, self-hosted sso across internal services without commercial identity pricing and putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxy are not what Teleport is typically brought in for.
What can authentik do that Teleport cannot?
authentik covers Configurable flows, Protocol support, Application proxy, Modern admin interface. Teleport covers Short-lived certificates, Protocol coverage, Session recording and replay, Access Requests.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

authentik: Is authentik free?

The open-source edition is free and complete for most use. An enterprise tier adds support and additional features.

Teleport: Is the open source edition usable in production?

Yes, but it lacks Access Requests, Device Trust and FIPS builds, which most compliance programmes end up requiring.

authentik: authentik or Keycloak?

authentik is generally reported as easier to run and administer; Keycloak is more established with a larger community and Red Hat behind it.

Teleport: How is it priced?

Not publicly. The vendor prices on active users and protected resources and provides a quote after a sales conversation.

authentik: Can authentik protect apps with no login of their own?

Yes. Its application proxy places authentication in front of services that have no built-in authentication.

Teleport: What happens if Teleport goes down?

Nobody reaches the resources behind it, so you need a highly available deployment and a documented break-glass procedure.

Teleport: Does it replace our VPN?

For anything you put behind it, yes. Legacy systems and appliances it does not support will keep the VPN alive.

Share

Related pages

More on authentik

More on Teleport

Keep looking

Other head to heads