No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Frontegg vs Red Hat Single Sign On comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Frontegg
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
20th
Average Rating
9.6
Reviews Sentiment
8.7
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Authentication Systems (34th), Customer Identity and Access Management (CIAM) (14th)
Red Hat Single Sign On
Ranking in Single Sign-On (SSO)
17th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Single Sign-On (SSO) category, the mindshare of Frontegg is 1.7%, down from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Single Sign On is 1.5%, down from 2.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Single Sign-On (SSO) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat Single Sign On1.5%
Frontegg1.7%
Other96.8%
Single Sign-On (SSO)
 

Featured Reviews

it_user1658712 - PeerSpot reviewer
Co-Founder & CTO at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Great granularity for roles and permissions and is multi-tenant by design
Today the features we’re using the most include the registration page, user and tenants management (including storing custom data on the tenant level to use as “feature flags”), and the admin portal. I like the admin portal since it allows us a full-stack solution for user management. The frontend side is a major benefit that I am happy I can give my customers from day one, without compromising. It helps us grow fast and focus our dev team on the core product while providing important user infrastructure to our customers. Another important benefit we discovered is the ease of integration. The integration with Frontegg is almost immediate, and the support is great. If you’re thinking of developing it on your own, don’t.
Giovanni Baruzzi - PeerSpot reviewer
Owner at Syntlogo GmbH
A stable and flexible solution with some basic capabilities
I set up Red Hat Single Sign-On in half an hour. I had to install a single sign-on solution for a customer. I reviewed a list of all available products, which were no more than fifty, and analyzed them. I chose it because it was convincing, modern, and based on technology from 2015. I put my trust in this product, and after nine years, I feel confident in my decision. Deploying this solution usually takes half an hour. You need an operating system running, then deploy the packages and prepare the interfaces. I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"We like the SSO, permissions and roles, multiple workspaces, and react login components."
"It has Audit Log and many cool features that if we were to develop them by ourselves, it would require a lot of research and development resources. Frontegg gives us everything we need to ensure that our customers have a safe and reliable authentication system in which they can also manage some of the features and roles by themself which gives them more control over their environment."
"Frontegg enabled us to worry less about parts of the system that are not unique to our product, and instead spend more time developing out key value propositions."
"Frontegg's solution fits us very well, as it removes the extra work of developing, maintaining, storing, and securing all of the user-management platforms."
"The frontend side is a major benefit that I am happy I can give my customers from day one, without compromising."
"The admin portal layer is super useful and saves valuable front-end development time."
"In addition, I was most impressed with Frontegg's quick turnaround to fix bugs and implement feature improvements."
"SaaS companies like ours can just focus on what matters and not spend time on building SaaS essentials such as audit logs, SSO etc."
"Red Hat SSO integrates well with our other solutions. Using OIDC protocols and ITL integration, employees can authenticate with Red Hat SSO and access our microservices."
"It is very easy to scale and use as you want."
"The solution is flexible and has the same basic capabilities right out of the box. The most important feature of this product is that it is a Red double-sided product. One side is a well-known open-source project; the other is a Red Hat commercial product. The commercial product benefits from all the experience and contributions of the community, making it a very well-developed product."
"I like that the solution is open source and you can use a commercial edition of it without any charge."
"Good support for single sign-on protocols."
"Red Hat SSO has a lot of very concise, well laid out documentation, which is available in the free edition as well."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to assign only one password for the user at a false value."
 

Cons

"It would be nice to have a export button to file with all tenants/users so that in case of a disaster we will have the option to restore the users from file."
"We're hoping to see more user management-related features, according to Frontegg's roadmap."
"The web interface is missing a way to delete a workspace. I have accidentally created a workspace and was not able to delete it. It's a minor thing that should be supported."
"Frontegg is fairly stable, however, we are looking forward to some promised capabilities, such as more tightly integrated Feature Flag support."
"The PHP SDK is limited. It's not a huge deal as we can just use their web API directly, but it is something to note if you're using PHP.‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‎‏‏‎ ‎‏‏‎ ‎‏‏‎ ‎‏‏‎ ‎‏‏‎"
"We really like the ability to add the same user across tenants. From a UX perspective, the flow can be betterized."
"The PHP SDK is limited."
"Red Hat SSO's architecture could be updated."
"Red Hat publishes much more and communicates its actions and plans. They could provide words, maps, and other resources."
"The product’s technical support services could be better."
"Security could be improved."
"They could provide more checks and balances to find out if there have been any security lapses, e.g., if somebody is trying to break into the system. Some other products have these detection mechanisms in case someone is trying to hack into the system or find out a user's passwords."
"I think they could provide additional features in terms of users trying to manipulate the system with regard to security."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is a low cost product. This product can be used by non-profit organizations or universities, when they don't want to invest a lot of money."
"The license is around $8000 USD."
"Red Hat Single Sign On is expensive."
"If you want support, that is when you use the paid version. There are different support categories that you can pay for, which provide different support levels. E.g., there is a quick response if you pay a higher amount, where the response time is within a few hours."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Single Sign-On (SSO) solutions are best for your needs.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
14%
Computer Software Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
No data available
 

Also Known As

No data available
Red Hat Single Sign-On, Red Hat SSO, RH SSO, RH-SSO
 

Overview

Find out what your peers are saying about Frontegg vs. Red Hat Single Sign On and other solutions. Updated: August 2026.
909,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.