Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Garden vs Keycloak

Garden logo

Garden

Developer Tools

Kubernetes development and testing automation with shared caching, now owned by Incredibuild

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Keycloak logo

Keycloak

Developer Tools

Open-source identity and access management server.

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Garden incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.; 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 Garden and Keycloak actually diverge.

Attributes where Garden and Keycloak differ
AttributeGardenKeycloak
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feeopen-source
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, KubernetesSelf-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 Garden

  • Action graph
  • Shared result caching
  • Remote Kubernetes environments
  • In-cluster builds
  • Same config everywhere
  • Hot reload sync
  • Helm and Kustomize support
  • Templating

Only in Keycloak

Nothing recorded that Garden does not also cover.

What people use each for

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

Garden

  • A platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loopnot Keycloak
  • An organisation with thirty or more services on Kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates productionnot Keycloak
  • Giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environmentnot Keycloak
  • Running the identical build and test definition locally and in CI so failures reproduce on a laptopnot Keycloak

Keycloak

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

Where each one falls short

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

Garden

  • Incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.
  • It is tightly bound to Kubernetes, so teams running on ECS, Nomad, plain VMs or serverless get little from it and would need a different tool entirely.
  • The YAML action graph is a real configuration surface: a large monorepo needs someone to own and maintain Garden config as a first-class artefact, which is a standing platform-engineering cost.
  • Shared remote environments mean every developer needs cluster access and a cost allocation model, so cloud spend rises and namespace sprawl becomes a thing you have to police.
  • Caching correctness depends on declaring dependencies accurately; an under-declared action will serve a stale cached pass and hide a genuine test failure, which is a hard class of bug to notice.

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

Garden

Free
  • Garden open sourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed CLI
    • Full action graph and caching
    • Self-managed clusters
  • Commercial tier$undefined/year
    • Hosted caching and team features
    • Support and onboarding
    • Pricing no longer published since the Incredibuild acquisition

Keycloak

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

Which should you pick?

Choose Garden if

  • You need action graph.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes.
  • You also want shared result caching.
Garden 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 Garden or Keycloak better?
Neither clearly leads. Garden starts at Free and Keycloak at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Garden or Keycloak?
Garden starts at Free and Keycloak at Free.
Does Garden or Keycloak run on more platforms?
Garden runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes. Keycloak runs on Self-hosted, Docker, Kubernetes, Linux, Windows, API.
Can I use Garden for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Garden best used for?
Garden is most often used for a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop, an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production, giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environment, running the identical build and test definition locally and in ci so failures reproduce on a laptop. Of those, a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop and an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production are not what Keycloak is typically brought in for.
What can Garden do that Keycloak cannot?
Garden covers Action graph, Shared result caching, Remote Kubernetes environments, In-cluster builds.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Garden: Is Garden still maintained?

The open source project remains on GitHub under Incredibuild ownership, but the commercial pricing page redirects to the docs and there is no public paid offer.

Keycloak: What protocols does Keycloak support?

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

Source
Garden: Do I need Kubernetes?

Effectively yes. Garden is built around Kubernetes environments and offers little to teams on other runtimes.

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
Garden: Does it replace my CI system?

No. It runs inside GitHub Actions, GitLab CI or similar and speeds up what those pipelines execute.

Keycloak: Is Keycloak free?

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

Source
Garden: What is the actual saving?

It comes from skipping builds and tests whose inputs have not changed, so the benefit scales with how many services you have and how often only a few change.

Share

Related pages

More on Garden

More on Keycloak

Keep looking

Other head to heads