Authelia vs authentik

Authelia — strengths

• Extremely lightweight — single binary or tiny container, trivial to deploy alongside Traefik/Nginx/Caddy
• Excellent documentation for the forward-auth integration pattern
• Apache-2.0 licence with no enterprise tier — all features free
• Low operational burden: no database required with the file backend, no workers, no separate processes
• Battle-tested in the homelab community — huge volume of working config examples for common setups

Authelia — weaknesses

• Not a full IdP — no OAuth2/OIDC token issuance, no SAML
• No web admin UI — all config via YAML
• No user self-service portal

authentik — strengths

• Full identity provider: issues OAuth2/OIDC tokens to apps, acts as SAML IdP, runs an LDAP server — replaces Okta/Keycloak at the homelab scale
• Self-service user portal: users enroll devices, reset passwords, and manage sessions without admin involvement
• Web admin UI covers every aspect of configuration — flows, providers, sources, outposts, certificates
• Powerful flow engine: customise every authentication step (enrollment, recovery, MFA) as a visual directed graph
• SCIM and directory sync targets for provisioning users from external identity sources

authentik — weaknesses

• Heavier resource footprint (server + worker, ~500 MB+)
• More operational complexity than a simple forward-auth gate
• Learning curve on the flow engine

When Authelia fits

• Homelab with 10 services behind Traefik, all internal: Authelia adds password + TOTP to every service in a forward-auth rule. Three containers (Authelia, Redis for sessions, optional MariaDB for users) and some Traefik labels, done in an evening.
• Family server where you want to protect Sonarr, Radarr, and Grafana behind a single login with 2FA before exposing them to the internet: Authelia is the canonical solution for this pattern and documentation covers it explicitly.
• Minimalist self-hoster who wants all config in version-controlled YAML and no web admin UI: Authelia's YAML-first approach means the entire config lives in one file that can be committed to git.

When authentik fits

• Developer who has a Nextcloud instance, a Gitea server, and a self-hosted Grafana and wants SSO so one login works for all three via OIDC: authentik acts as the OIDC provider; each app gets a provider configured in the authentik UI. Authelia cannot issue OIDC tokens.
• Organisation replacing a legacy Active Directory with a self-hosted LDAP + SSO stack: authentik's LDAP outpost provides a real LDAP server that existing apps can bind against, while also issuing OIDC tokens for modern apps.
• Home server where family members need to self-enroll TOTP and reset their own passwords without bothering the admin: authentik's user portal covers this; Authelia requires admin action for every enrollment.

Authelia gotchas

• Authelia is a gate, not an IdP — applications that need to receive OAuth2 access tokens (native mobile apps, API clients) cannot use Authelia alone; you still need an IdP or service-specific auth
• All configuration is YAML — there is no web UI to make changes; mistakes in config cause auth to fail for all proxied services until fixed
• Session storage requires Redis (or Valkey) for multi-instance deployments; single-instance can use memory but loses sessions on restart
• No user self-service — password resets and 2FA device enrollment require admin intervention or separate tooling

authentik gotchas

• Significantly heavier than Authelia — server + worker process means ~500 MB minimum RAM; on a 2 GB Pi this matters
• The flow engine is powerful but has a learning curve — misconfigured flows can lock you out; always keep an emergency admin bypass
• Upgrades are frequent and sometimes require attention; the project moves fast and the upgrade guide should be read before each major version
• Enterprise features (support SLA, enterprise SSO sources, advanced compliance) are a separate commercial tier — MIT CE is fully functional but support is community only

Choose Authelia when

Pick Authelia if you want a lightweight 2FA + SSO gate for reverse-proxied services, all config in YAML, and no user self-service required. It is the right pick for homelabs where the apps only need to check "is this person authenticated?" and do not need OAuth2 tokens.

Choose authentik when

Pick authentik if you need a full identity provider — issuing OAuth2/OIDC tokens, acting as a SAML IdP, running an LDAP server, or letting users self-service their credentials. It is also the right pick when you want a web UI over YAML configuration.

Migration

There is no direct migration path because the two tools serve different functions. If you currently run Authelia and want to add OIDC support for a new application, the typical path is to deploy authentik alongside Authelia, move OIDC-capable apps to authentik, and leave the forward-auth protected apps on Authelia until you are ready to consolidate. Full consolidation to authentik means reconfiguring each reverse-proxy rule to use authentik's outpost or forward-auth endpoint instead of Authelia's — a proxy-by-proxy process, not a bulk import.

Frequently asked questions

Can Authelia act as an OIDC provider for apps like Nextcloud?

No. Authelia is a forward-auth gate, not an OAuth2/OIDC issuer. For apps that need to receive an OIDC access token (Nextcloud, Gitea, Grafana in SSO mode), you need authentik, Keycloak, Kanidm, or a similar IdP.

Can authentik replace Authelia for forward-auth?

Yes — authentik ships forward-auth outposts that integrate with Traefik, Nginx, and Caddy in the same way Authelia does. However, authentik's forward-auth setup is more complex to configure and the footprint is larger.

Which is easier to set up?

Authelia, by a wide margin, for the forward-auth use case. A working docker-compose stack with Traefik + Authelia is a standard config that many documented guides cover in under an hour.

Does authentik support hardware keys (WebAuthn / FIDO2)?

Yes. Both support WebAuthn/FIDO2 passkeys and hardware security keys. authentik additionally supports passkey-only flows where no password is required.

Which is better for a Kubernetes homelab?

authentik has a Kubernetes operator and a well-documented outpost pattern. Authelia works well on Kubernetes too but fits more naturally in a docker-compose / single-node model. For a multi-tenant k8s cluster where SSO is needed across many namespaced apps, authentik's model scales better.

What about Keycloak?

Keycloak is the enterprise standard for self-hosted IdP and is significantly heavier (~1 GB RAM) and more complex than authentik. For homelab and small-team use, authentik is generally preferred for its better UI and lower footprint. Keycloak is worth the overhead only for organisations with existing Keycloak expertise or Red Hat support needs.

Is Authelia free?

Yes — Apache-2.0, all features included, no paid tier. authentik is MIT for the community edition; enterprise features (SLA, enterprise SSO sources) are a separate commercial subscription.