Gane Index
All indexesEvery index and its categoriesGTMMarketing, sales, customer and revenue operations softwareITSecurity, IT operations, cloud, developer and data softwareHRHR, payroll, recruiting, performance and learning softwareFinanceAccounting, planning, spend, billing and treasury software
Claim your listing
Index › IT › Identity and access › CIAM › Keycloak vs Firebase Authentication
Customer identity and access management · November 2026 Edition

Keycloak vs Firebase Authentication

Zero of fourteen models named Keycloak first on the direct prompt; zero named Firebase Authentication. Keycloak was named by ten of the fourteen models and Firebase Authentication by nine and Keycloak carries 15 labels and Firebase Authentication 12, so the shares are not directly comparable.

Keycloak

accepted challenger

Named in five categories this edition.

Firebase Authentication

criticized challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share4%4%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate20%25%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#7#8A position in a field of 16; printed, not drawn.
Labels1512A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Keycloak reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Frontegg was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Auth0 vs Keycloak · Auth0 vs Firebase Authentication · WorkOS AuthKit vs Keycloak

Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the customer identity and access management page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
KeycloakFirst choices, of fourteen modelsFirebase Authentication
Direct00
Paraphrase00
Comparative001 against Keycloak
Budget-constrained22
Scale-constrained001 against Firebase Authentication
Negative002 against Keycloak · 2 against Firebase Authentication
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, Keycloak and Firebase Authentication were named in the same answer eighteen times, of the 63 answers naming Keycloak and the 48 naming Firebase Authentication. In those answers Firebase Authentication took the first choice two times and Keycloak one.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Keycloak and Firebase Authentication stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
Claude Haiku 4.5
GPT-5.4 mini
Gemini 3.5 Flash
Perplexity Sonar
Grok 4.20
Mistral Small
DeepSeek V4 Flash
Llama 4 Maverick
Qwen 3.7 Flash
Kimi K2
GLM 4.7 FlashX
MiniMax M2.5
GPT-6 Luna
Muse Glimmer 30B
Keycloak Firebase Authentication first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Keycloak on the left and Firebase Authentication on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Keycloak and Firebase Authentication stood in it.

Neither was named

14 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Auth0 alternatives: Frontegg, OneLogin, The OneWelcome Identity Platform
GPT-5.4 miniAuth0 alternatives: Frontegg, Ping Identity
Gemini 3.5 FlashWorkOS AuthKit alternatives: Clerk, Descope, Frontegg, Stytch
Perplexity SonarAuth0 alternatives: Amazon Cognito, Frontegg, FusionAuth, Microsoft Entra External ID, WorkOS AuthKit
Grok 4.20WorkOS AuthKit alternatives: Auth0, Frontegg, Stytch
Mistral SmallAuth0 alternatives: Frontegg, Microsoft Entra External ID
DeepSeek V4 FlashFrontegg alternatives: Descope, Kinde, WorkOS AuthKit
Llama 4 MaverickAuth0 alternatives: IBM Verify, Microsoft Entra External ID, Ping Identity, WSO2 Identity Server, WorkOS AuthKit
Qwen 3.7 FlashFrontegg alternatives: Auth0, Descope, Microsoft Entra External ID, Stytch
Kimi K2WorkOS AuthKit alternatives: Frontegg, Stytch
GLM 4.7 FlashXAuth0 alternatives: Amazon Cognito, Descope, Frontegg, Microsoft Entra External ID, Ping Identity, SSOJet, Stytch, Transmit Security
MiniMax M2.5OneLogin alternatives: Frontegg, LoginRadius, SSOJet
GPT-6 LunaWorkOS AuthKit alternatives: Auth0, Stytch
Muse Glimmer 30BKinde, WorkOS AuthKit alternatives: Auth0, Frontegg, Okta, OneLogin

Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.

By buyer segment

The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Level: the same share of first choices.
Keycloak0%#14 of 15
Firebase Authentication0%#12 of 15
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Keycloak4%#7 of 16
Firebase Authentication4%#8 of 16
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Keycloak0%#– of 13
Firebase Authentication0%#– of 13
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about Keycloak

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of four in this category shown.

“High Operational Burden: Open-source platforms like Keycloak are feature-complete... you assume 100% of the responsibility for hosting” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Even popular tools like Keycloak (which has seen rising popularity) require significant engineering effort to maintain.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“FusionAuth and Keycloak stand out because they offer free self-hosted options with no per-user fees” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Lowest cash spend, higher engineering effort: Keycloak” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about Firebase Authentication

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of seven in this category shown.

“you are likely beyond basic "build-it-yourself" or lightweight authentication (like basic Firebase/Cognito setups)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · scale prompt · soft negative
“Firebase lacks native support for multi-tenancy, tenant-level branding, enterprise SAML/OIDC” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Firebase Authentication for governance-heavy environments. Treat it cautiously” Perplexity Sonar · negative prompt · soft negative
“Supabase Auth or Firebase | Up to 50k free MAUs and pennies per thousand users afterward.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Need maximum free MAUs for a hosted SaaS: WorkOS User Management or Firebase Authentication.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“Choose Firebase Auth if you are building a mobile app or MVP on Google Cloud” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · alternative
Also compared
Auth0 vs KeycloakAuth0 vs Firebase AuthenticationWorkOS AuthKit vs KeycloakWorkOS AuthKit vs Firebase AuthenticationFrontegg vs KeycloakFrontegg vs Firebase AuthenticationKinde vs KeycloakKinde vs Firebase AuthenticationFusionAuth vs KeycloakFusionAuth vs Firebase AuthenticationClerk vs KeycloakClerk vs Firebase AuthenticationAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full CIAM standing

Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.