Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

authentik vs Transmit Security

authentik logo

authentik

Cybersecurity

Open-source identity provider with flexible authentication flows

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Transmit Security logo

Transmit Security

Cybersecurity

Customer identity platform built around passwordless and fraud signals

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; Transmit Security pricing is not published, so it cannot be compared early against competitors that post per monthly active user rates, and the eventual quote often mixes per-user and per-transaction units.
  • They diverge on capability: authentik covers Configurable flows, Transmit Security covers Passwordless authentication.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 1 September 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which authentik and Transmit Security actually diverge.

Attributes where authentik and Transmit Security differ
AttributeauthentikTransmit Security
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen-source core with a paid enterprise tierquote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsDocker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hostedWeb, iOS, Android

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 Transmit Security

  • Passwordless authentication
  • Detection and response
  • Identity verification
  • Orchestration
  • Account recovery
  • Bot and automation detection
  • Composable APIs

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 Transmit Security
  • Putting authentication in front of applications that have none, via the proxynot Transmit Security
  • Teams who tried Keycloak and wanted something less heavynot Transmit Security

Transmit Security

  • A bank moving a consumer base off passwords to passkeys without losing customers at the migration stepnot authentik
  • An insurer whose account recovery flow is the main account takeover route and needs risk scoring inside itnot authentik
  • A retailer that wants bot detection at login rather than only at checkoutnot authentik
  • An organisation replacing an in-house customer login system that has become an unfunded engineering liabilitynot 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

Transmit Security

  • Pricing is not published, so it cannot be compared early against competitors that post per monthly active user rates, and the eventual quote often mixes per-user and per-transaction units.
  • Migrating a live consumer identity base is a high risk project, and credential migration constraints mean some users must re-register, which shows up as measurable churn.
  • The vendor is smaller than the identity incumbents, so the partner and systems integrator pool is thinner and staffing a large programme is harder.
  • Workforce identity is not the focus, so an organisation wanting one vendor for employees and customers will still run two platforms.
  • The fraud detection value depends on traffic volume feeding the models, so a smaller deployment gets less benefit from exactly the capability that justified choosing it over a plain identity provider.

Pricing, plan by plan

authentik

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

Transmit Security

On request
  • Transmit Security Platform$undefined/year
    • Priced per monthly active user or per transaction by service
    • Services licensed individually or as a platform
    • Free developer tier for evaluation

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 Transmit Security if

  • You need passwordless authentication.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want detection and response.
Transmit Security review

Questions people ask

Is authentik or Transmit Security better?
Neither clearly leads. authentik starts at Free and Transmit Security at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, authentik or Transmit Security?
authentik has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for authentik and On request for Transmit Security.
Does authentik or Transmit Security run on more platforms?
authentik runs on Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Self-hosted. Transmit Security runs on Web, iOS, Android.
Can I use authentik for free?
Yes. authentik has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Transmit Security 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 Transmit Security is typically brought in for.
What can authentik do that Transmit Security cannot?
authentik covers Configurable flows, Protocol support, Application proxy, Modern admin interface. Transmit Security covers Passwordless authentication, Detection and response, Identity verification, Orchestration.

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.

Transmit Security: Do we have to replace our existing identity provider?

No. The services are composable, so detection and response or verification can be adopted alongside an existing provider such as Okta or Entra ID.

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.

Transmit Security: Is fraud detection an extra licence?

It is a separate service, but it is designed to run inside the authentication flow rather than as a bolted-on second vendor. Confirm which services are in your quote.

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.

Transmit Security: Is there a way to try it?

Yes, a free developer tier exists for evaluation, though production use is an enterprise agreement.

Share

Related pages

More on authentik

More on Transmit Security

Keep looking

Other head to heads