CyberArk vs Keycloak
Which one do AI engines recommend, and how do they differ on price, fit and features?
The short answer
CyberArk is the stronger AI pick in Identity & Access Management: it has a visibility score of 15.6 versus 5.6 for Keycloak, and ranks ahead in 50% of the answers that name both.
Choose CyberArk if…
- You want the brand AI engines rank higher (15.6 vs 5.6)
- AI answers describe it more positively (49% vs 33% positive)
- You need SOC 2 or SOC 3 or ISO/IEC 27001:2022 or ISO/IEC 27017:2015 or ISO/IEC 27018:2019 or ISO 9001:2015 or ISO/IEC 42001:2023 or ISO 22301 or CSA STAR or Cyber Essentials or Cyber Essentials Plus or FedRAMP High or Common Criteria or PCI DSS v4.0.1 or HIPAA or IRAP or GDPR or CCPA coverage
- Market leader in privileged access management (PAM)
Choose Keycloak if…
- Free and open-source software
- Strong flexibility and customization for technical teams
- Top pick as a self-hosted option
- Backed by Red Hat and community; popular open-source IAM tool
AI visibility side by side
Latest weekly run · Nov 3
| Metric | CyberArk | Keycloak |
|---|---|---|
| Visibility score | 15.6% | 5.6% |
| Change vs last week | up+2.1% | down−0.3% |
| Rank in Identity & Access Management | #7 | #15 |
| Share of voice | 6.1% | 2.1% |
| Mentions this run | 19 | 7 |
| Positive in AI answers | 49% | 33% |
The stronger value in each row is marked with a ✓.
Visibility score trend
Weekly runs over the last 60 days
CyberArk +0.5pp · Keycloak −0.7000000000000002pp over 1 weekly runs.
Engine by engine
CyberArk leads on 3 of 3 engines
Head to head in AI answers
2 engine answers name both brands
| Prompt | Engine | CyberArk | Keycloak |
|---|---|---|---|
| What are the best Identity & Access Management tools in 2026? | Perplexity | #5 | #8 |
| Alternatives to the most popular identity and access management platform | Perplexity | #10 | #8 |
Features, pricing & fit
| Dimension | CyberArk | Keycloak |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Self-hosted and SaaS | Self-hosted; ships as a single lightweight container image, with clustering for scalability and availability |
| Compliance | SOC 2, SOC 3, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, ISO 9001:2015, ISO/IEC 42001:2023, ISO 22301, CSA STAR, Cyber Essentials, Cyber Essentials Plus, FedRAMP High, Common Criteria, PCI DSS v4.0.1, HIPAA, IRAP, GDPR, CCPA | — |
| Support | Support contact, Knowledge base, Technical community | Community support via GitHub Discussions, Commercial support via Red Hat build of Keycloak |
| Founded | 1999 | 2014 |
| Headquarters | Newton, MA, United States | — |
| Employees | 1,001–5,000 | — |
| Funding | Post-IPO debt | — |
| Best for | Enterprises that need to secure privileged access for human and machine identities. | Teams that want to self-host standards-based single sign-on and identity brokering for their applications |
Pros and cons
Themes from the AI answers that mention each brand
CyberArk
- Market leader in privileged access management (PAM)
- Strong identity security and credential risk mitigation
- Security-first approach with strong behavioral analytics
- Bridges standard access management with robust PAM and machine identity security
- Strong for enterprises combining workforce identity with PAM
Keycloak
- Free and open-source software
- Strong flexibility and customization for technical teams
- Top pick as a self-hosted option
- Backed by Red Hat and community; popular open-source IAM tool
- Supports SAML, OAuth 2.0, and OpenID Connect
- Team must handle hosting, upgrades, backups, and security
- Less operational simplicity than managed alternatives
Data collected ·ChatGPT, Perplexity, Google AI Mode·coverage 98.8%·next run
Cite as: SlateIndex, “CyberArk vs Keycloak”, https://slateindex.ai/compare/cyberark-vs-keycloak, data of Nov 3, 2026. Licence: CC BY 4.0.