PocketBase vs Keycloak
Detailed comparison to help you choose the right tool for your needs
P
PocketBase
Open-source backend in a single file — realtime database, auth, and file storage
4.5
Editorial RatingK
Keycloak
Open-source identity and access management — self-hosted Auth0 alternative
4.2
Editorial RatingQuick Comparison
Rating
4.5
vs4.2
Starting Price
Free
vsFree
Pricing Model
free
vsfree
Feature
PocketBase
Keycloak
Embedded database
Realtime subscriptions
Built-in authentication
File storage
Admin dashboard
REST API
Single Sign-On
SAML & OpenID Connect
Social login
User federation (LDAP/AD)
Admin console
Fine-grained authorization
PocketBase Pros
- Single binary — incredibly easy to deploy
- Zero configuration needed
- Built-in auth, files, and realtime
- Perfect for MVPs and side projects
PocketBase Cons
- SQLite limits horizontal scaling
- Smaller ecosystem than Firebase/Supabase
- Not ideal for high-write workloads
Keycloak Pros
- Enterprise-grade identity management
- Backed by Red Hat
- Supports every auth protocol
- Massive adoption in enterprise
Keycloak Cons
- Java-based — heavier resource usage
- Complex initial configuration
- Documentation can be overwhelming