6 open-source options compared for API gateway for microservices, with live GitHub data on each.
Last updated Repo data refreshed 25 Oct 20266 options
Our pick · kong
Our pick is Kong because it provides a mature, performant, and extensible API and AI Gateway platform, ideal for diverse microservice architectures. Its rich plugin ecosystem enables deep customization for complex traffic management, security, and authentication, making it a reliable foundation for robust features and proven scalability, despite a moderately complex initial setup. For those prioritizing cloud-native dynamic configuration, Apache APISIX, a Cloud-Native API Gateway and AI Gateway, is a strong alternative. KrakenD-CE, a high-performance, stateless, declarative API Gateway, is an excellent choice when raw stateless performance and API aggregation are paramount, offering a simpler footprint.
Kong vs APISIX vs Tyk vs Envoy Gateway vs KrakenD vs kgateway: side by side
Tyk is an open-core API and AI Gateway supporting various protocols including REST, GraphQL, TCP, gRPC, and MCP.
Best for: Teams that require broad protocol support, especially for GraphQL and gRPC, and are considering a potential future upgrade to a comprehensive API management solution.
What's good
Provides broad protocol support, including GraphQL, gRPC, and TCP, making it versatile for diverse microservice communication.
Built in Go, which contributes to good performance and results in a lightweight, single executable.
Offers flexible deployment options, suitable for both on-premises infrastructure and Kubernetes environments.
Its open-core model provides a path for future feature upgrades within the same ecosystem.
Watch out for
Many advanced features and tools, such as the developer portal and analytics, are exclusively available in the commercial product.
The community might be less active or extensive compared to some larger open-source projects.
Configuring complex policies and integrations can be intricate, requiring careful attention.
Envoy Gateway manages Envoy Proxy as a standalone or Kubernetes-based application gateway.
Best for: Cloud-native organizations heavily invested in Kubernetes and aiming to deploy and manage Envoy Proxy as their API gateway with streamlined configuration.
What's good
Leverages the highly performant and widely adopted Envoy Proxy as its data plane, ensuring robust traffic management.
Designed with deep integration for Kubernetes and aligns with the Gateway API specification.
Simplifies the operational complexity of deploying and managing Envoy for API Gateway use cases.
Ideal for organizations already utilizing or planning to adopt Envoy Proxy within their cloud-native stacks.
Watch out for
Its strong focus on Kubernetes makes it less suitable or straightforward for non-Kubernetes deployments.
As a relatively newer project, it is still evolving compared to more established API gateways.
A foundational understanding of Envoy Proxy and Kubernetes concepts is often required, leading to a steeper learning curve.
★ 5,723 starsLicence: Apache-2.0Last commit 23 Oct 2026Latest release 16 Oct 2026Go
KGateway is a cloud-native API and AI Gateway focused on modern microservice architectures.
Best for: Teams building new cloud-native microservice platforms who are looking for a modern, actively developed gateway with AI capabilities, and are open to a growing ecosystem.
What's good
Designed specifically for cloud-native environments, offering dynamic scaling and modern deployment patterns.
Provides a modern approach to API management with an emphasis on ease of use and developer experience.
Recent and consistent activity indicates ongoing development and active maintenance.
Includes nascent AI Gateway capabilities, aligning with emerging trends in API management.
Watch out for
Features a smaller community and less widespread adoption compared to established gateways like Kong or Apache APISIX.
Offers a less extensive feature set and plugin ecosystem at this stage of its development.
Maturity is still developing in terms of widespread battle-tested deployments compared to more veteran projects.
"Dormant" means no commit pushed to the default branch in the last 12 months. "Archived" means the maintainers have marked the repository read-only on GitHub. "Deprecated" means the project's README says it is deprecated or no longer maintained. Stars, licence, commit and release dates come from the GitHub API (GitLab for projects developed there) and are cached for up to 24 hours. On licences: a custom licence is a licence file that isn't a single standard licence; open-core means the core is open-source and the enterprise code is licensed separately. Check the linked licence file before use. The written analysis is AI-assisted and checked against that data.
Kong vs Tyk at a glance
Kong's open-source gateway is licensed Apache-2.0 and can run without a database in DB-less mode, or with PostgreSQL. Tyk's gateway is MPL-2.0, with the code in its ee folder under a separate commercial licence, and it needs Redis. Kong Manager OSS gives Kong a free web UI; Tyk's Dashboard GUI comes with its commercial Tyk Self-Managed platform.
For licences, datastores, plugins and who each one suits, see Kong vs Tyk.
KrakenD is stateless: every node runs independently in a cluster, with no coordination or central persistence, so there is no database to operate. Its behaviour is defined in a configuration file, which KrakenDesigner, KrakenD's configuration editor, can produce. That makes it a fit for aggregating and transforming backend APIs, rather than for a gateway managed through an admin console.
Each vendor publishes its own numbers, measured on its own hardware and test cases. Kong's benchmark page reports about 144,000 requests per second for a proxy with no plugins. The Apache APISIX README claims 140,000 queries per second on an AWS eight-core server, with 0.2 ms latency. The KrakenD README claims more than 70,000 requests per second on a single regular-sized instance. Tyk's benchmark page argues that its Go code significantly outperforms Lua, the language Kong and APISIX use.
These are vendor claims. They use different hardware, plugins and test set-ups, so they contradict each other and can't be compared directly. Benchmark your own workload before choosing a gateway on speed.
In their open-source editions, Kong has Kong Manager OSS, a free web UI, and Apache APISIX has the APISIX Dashboard. Tyk's Dashboard GUI is part of the commercial Tyk Self-Managed platform. KrakenD has KrakenDesigner, an editor for its configuration rather than an admin console. Envoy Gateway and kgateway are configured through Kubernetes Gateway API resources, and their READMEs don't describe a GUI.
None of the six gateways on this page is written in Java. By GitHub's language data, Kong and Apache APISIX are written in Lua (APISIX is built on NGINX), and Tyk, KrakenD, Envoy Gateway and kgateway in Go. Each runs as its own process in front of your services, so a Java stack can use any of them.
KrakenD has the fewest moving parts: its stateless design runs each node on its own, with no database or central persistence. Kong can also run without a database in DB-less mode, from a declarative YAML or JSON file, and APISIX can run in standalone mode from a local file instead of etcd. Tyk's open-source gateway needs Redis.
Kong Gateway's open-source edition is free under the Apache-2.0 licence, and Kong Manager OSS is free as well. Kong Inc. also sells Kong Konnect, which includes fully managed cloud gateways, and paid plans with extra features and support.
Envoy Gateway and kgateway are built around the Kubernetes Gateway API: both configure Envoy from Gateway API resources. Kong and Apache APISIX support Gateway API through their ingress controllers, Kong Ingress Controller and APISIX Ingress Controller. For a Kubernetes-first setup, Envoy Gateway or kgateway is the most direct fit; Kong or APISIX suits teams that also run the gateway outside Kubernetes.
Are Kong, APISIX, Tyk, Envoy Gateway, KrakenD and kgateway actively maintained?
Kong, APISIX, Tyk, Envoy Gateway, KrakenD and kgateway are active: each has had a commit in the last 12 months (most recent: Kong on 19 Oct 2026, APISIX on 23 Oct 2026, Tyk on 23 Oct 2026, Envoy Gateway on 23 Oct 2026, KrakenD on 21 Oct 2026, kgateway on 23 Oct 2026). Status is checked against GitHub daily.
What licences do Kong, APISIX, Tyk, Envoy Gateway, KrakenD and kgateway use?
Which is easiest to learn: Kong, APISIX, Tyk, Envoy Gateway, KrakenD or kgateway?
By our estimate (1 = easiest, 5 = steepest): Kong 3/5, APISIX 3/5, Tyk 3/5, Envoy Gateway 4/5, KrakenD 2/5, kgateway 3/5. KrakenD has the gentlest learning curve. This is ExploreGit's AI-assisted estimate, not a measured figure.
