Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Cortex vs Keycloak

Cortex logo

Cortex

Developer Tools

Internal developer portal that scores service ownership and maturity rather than just cataloguing services

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Keycloak logo

Keycloak

Developer Tools

Open-source identity and access management server.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Keycloak has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Cortex pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.; Keycloak requires self-hosted deployment and operational expertise to install, configure and maintain
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Cortex and Keycloak actually diverge.

Attributes where Cortex and Keycloak differ
AttributeCortexKeycloak
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteopen-source
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, APISelf-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API

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

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 Cortex

  • Service catalogue
  • Scorecards
  • Initiatives
  • Self-service templates
  • Query language
  • Eng intelligence
  • Integrations layer
  • On-call and ownership mapping

Only in Keycloak

Nothing recorded that Cortex does not also cover.

What people use each for

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

Cortex

  • A platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a Kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of servicesnot Keycloak
  • An organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitionsnot Keycloak
  • Enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident reviewnot Keycloak
  • Replacing a self-hosted Backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgradednot Keycloak

Keycloak

  • Organisations requiring self-hosted identity infrastructure for compliance or data residencynot Cortex
  • Companies with existing LDAP/Active Directory systems needing federated authenticationnot Cortex
  • Open-source projects and communities requiring free IAM without licensing costsnot Cortex
  • Enterprises building custom identity workflows requiring fine-grained authorisationnot Cortex
  • Teams with sufficient operational expertise to manage infrastructurenot Cortex

Where each one falls short

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

Cortex

  • Pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.
  • The catalogue is only as accurate as the metadata you supply, so an organisation with inconsistent repository conventions spends its first quarter cleaning data before any scorecard means anything.
  • Scorecards create political friction: publishing a per-team grade turns an engineering standard into a performance metric, and teams will game the rules rather than fix the underlying issue.
  • It is closed source and hosted, so organisations with strict data residency or air-gap requirements have limited options compared with running Backstage themselves.
  • Value scales with organisation size, so a company with fifty engineers and thirty services will find the catalogue tells them nothing they did not already know while still paying an enterprise contract.

Keycloak

  • Requires self-hosted deployment and operational expertise to install, configure and maintain
  • No managed cloud option provided by Red Hat; organisations must operate infrastructure themselves or use third-party distributions
  • Clustering and high-availability configurations require additional operational knowledge
  • Community support only; commercial support requires third-party vendors or distributions

Pricing, plan by plan

Cortex

On request
  • Cortex$undefined/year
    • Service catalogue and ownership mapping
    • Scorecards and initiatives
    • Self-service templates

Keycloak

Free
  • Open-sourceFree
    • Full platform functionality
    • Self-hosted deployment
    • Community support

Which should you pick?

Choose Cortex if

  • You need service catalogue.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want scorecards.
Cortex review

Choose Keycloak if

  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Self-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API.
Keycloak review

Questions people ask

Is Cortex or Keycloak better?
Neither clearly leads. Cortex starts at On request and Keycloak at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Cortex or Keycloak?
Keycloak has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Cortex and Free for Keycloak.
Does Cortex or Keycloak run on more platforms?
Cortex runs on Web, API. Keycloak runs on Self-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API.
Can I use Keycloak for free?
Yes. Keycloak has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Cortex starts at On request.
What is Cortex best used for?
Cortex is most often used for a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services, an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions, enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident review, replacing a self-hosted backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgraded. Of those, a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services and an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions are not what Keycloak is typically brought in for.
What can Cortex do that Keycloak cannot?
Cortex covers Service catalogue, Scorecards, Initiatives, Self-service templates.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Cortex: How is Cortex different from Backstage?

Backstage is an open source framework you build and staff. Cortex is a hosted product with scorecards and initiatives out of the box and no platform team required to keep it running.

Keycloak: What protocols does Keycloak support?

Keycloak supports OpenID Connect, OAuth 2.0 and SAML 2.0 protocols for authentication and authorisation.

Source
Cortex: Is pricing published?

No. Cortex requires a sales conversation and prepares a custom proposal.

Keycloak: Can Keycloak integrate with existing user directories?

Yes. Keycloak supports user federation with LDAP and Active Directory systems, allowing organisations to leverage existing user directories.

Source
Cortex: Can it self-host?

It is offered as a hosted product; on-premise arrangements are handled through sales rather than published.

Keycloak: Is Keycloak free?

Yes. Keycloak is fully open-source and free to deploy and use. No licensing fees are required.

Source
Cortex: What is the main adoption risk?

Bad or missing service metadata. The catalogue and every scorecard on top of it inherit whatever quality your repositories already have.

Share

Related pages

More on Cortex

More on Keycloak

Keep looking

Other head to heads