StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. Utilities
  3. API Tools
  4. API Gateway
  5. Kong vs Traefik

Kong vs Traefik

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Kong
Kong
Stacks671
Followers1.5K
Votes139
GitHub Stars42.1K
Forks5.0K
Traefik
Traefik
Stacks965
Followers1.2K
Votes93

Kong vs Traefik: What are the differences?

Kong and Traefik are both popular API gateway solutions used for managing and securing microservices architectures. Let's explore the key differences between Kong and Traefik.

  1. Architecture: Kong follows a plugin-based architecture that allows developers to extend its functionality by adding custom plugins. On the other hand, Traefik follows a middleware-based architecture that provides a streamlined request processing flow by chaining middleware functions.

  2. Routing and Load Balancing: Kong supports a wide range of routing and load balancing algorithms, including round-robin, least connections, and consistent hashing. Traefik, on the other hand, offers dynamic routing and load balancing, leveraging service discovery mechanisms to automatically configure routes and balance traffic across services.

  3. Service Discovery: Kong requires an external service discovery mechanism, such as Consul or etcd, to dynamically discover and route requests to backend services. Traefik, on the other hand, comes with built-in support for service discovery, allowing it to automatically detect new services as they are deployed and configure routing accordingly.

  4. Health Checking: Kong provides basic health checking functionalities for backend services by periodically sending requests to endpoints and evaluating their responses. Traefik offers more advanced health checking capabilities, including support for custom health checks and passive health checks based on metrics from monitoring systems.

  5. TLS Termination: Kong supports TLS termination out-of-the-box, allowing it to handle SSL encryption and decryption for incoming requests. Traefik also supports TLS termination but offers additional features like automatic certificate provisioning using Let's Encrypt.

  6. Deployment Flexibility: Kong can be deployed as a standalone service or as a Kubernetes Ingress Controller, providing flexibility for various deployment scenarios. Traefik is designed with cloud-native environments in mind and can be easily integrated into container orchestration platforms like Kubernetes and Docker.

In summary, Kong, an open-source API gateway and microservices management layer, offers extensive features for API traffic control and security, while Traefik, a modern reverse proxy and load balancer, excels in its simplicity and automatic configuration, making it particularly suitable for dynamic containerized environments like Docker and Kubernetes.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Kong, Traefik

Gabriel
Gabriel

CEO at Naologic

Mar 16, 2020

DecidedonNGINXNGINXTraefikTraefik

We switched to Traefik so we can use the REST API to dynamically configure subdomains and have the ability to redirect between multiple servers.

We still use NGINX with a docker-compose to expose the traffic from our APIs and TCP microservices, but for managing routing to the internet Traefik does a much better job

The biggest win for naologic was the ability to set dynamic configurations without having to restart the server

1.42M views1.42M
Comments
Prateek
Prateek

Fullstack Engineer| Ruby | React JS | gRPC at Ex Bookmyshow | Furlenco | Shopmatic

Mar 14, 2020

Decided

Istio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn-keyIstio based on powerful Envoy whereas Kong based on Nginx. Istio is K8S native as well it's actively developed when k8s was successfully accepted with production-ready apps whereas Kong slowly migrated to start leveraging K8s. Istio has an inbuilt turn key solution with Rancher whereas Kong completely lacks here. Traffic distribution in Istio can be done via canary, a/b, shadowing, HTTP headers, ACL, whitelist whereas in Kong it's limited to canary, ACL, blue-green, proxy caching. Istio has amazing community support which is visible via Github stars or releases when comparing both.

322k views322k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Kong
Kong
Traefik
Traefik

Kong is a scalable, open source API Layer (also known as an API Gateway, or API Middleware). Kong controls layer 4 and 7 traffic and is extended through Plugins, which provide extra functionality and services beyond the core platform.

A modern HTTP reverse proxy and load balancer that makes deploying microservices easy. Traefik integrates with your existing infrastructure components and configures itself automatically and dynamically.

Logging: Log requests and responses to your system over TCP, UDP or to disk; OAuth2.0: Add easily an OAuth2.0 authentication to your APIs; Monitoring: Live monitoring provides key load and performance server metrics; IP-restriction: Whitelist or blacklist IPs that can make requests; Authentication: Manage consumer credentials query string and header tokens; Rate-limiting: Block and throttle requests based on IP or authentication; Transformations: Add, remove or manipulate HTTP params and headers on-the-fly; CORS: Enable cross-origin requests to your APIs that would otherwise be blocked; Anything: Need custom functionality? Extend Kong with your own Lua plugins;
Continuously updates its configuration (No restarts!); Supports multiple load balancing algorithms; Provides HTTPS to your microservices by leveraging Let's Encrypt (wildcard certificates support); Circuit breakers, retry; High Availability with cluster mode; See the magic through its clean web UI; Websocket, HTTP/2, GRPC ready; Provides metrics; Keeps access logs; Fast; Exposes a Rest API
Statistics
GitHub Stars
42.1K
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Forks
5.0K
GitHub Forks
-
Stacks
671
Stacks
965
Followers
1.5K
Followers
1.2K
Votes
139
Votes
93
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 37
    Easy to maintain
  • 32
    Easy to install
  • 26
    Flexible
  • 21
    Great performance
  • 7
    Api blueprint
Pros
  • 20
    Kubernetes integration
  • 18
    Watch service discovery updates
  • 14
    Letsencrypt support
  • 13
    Swarm integration
  • 12
    Several backends
Cons
  • 7
    Not very performant (fast)
  • 7
    Complicated setup
Integrations
Cassandra
Cassandra
Docker
Docker
Prometheus
Prometheus
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
PostgreSQL
PostgreSQL
NGINX
NGINX
Vagrant
Vagrant
Marathon
Marathon
InfluxDB
InfluxDB
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
Docker
Docker
gRPC
gRPC
Let's Encrypt
Let's Encrypt
Google Kubernetes Engine
Google Kubernetes Engine
Consul
Consul
StatsD
StatsD
Docker Swarm
Docker Swarm

What are some alternatives to Kong, Traefik?

HAProxy

HAProxy

HAProxy (High Availability Proxy) is a free, very fast and reliable solution offering high availability, load balancing, and proxying for TCP and HTTP-based applications.

AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)

AWS Elastic Load Balancing (ELB)

With Elastic Load Balancing, you can add and remove EC2 instances as your needs change without disrupting the overall flow of information. If one EC2 instance fails, Elastic Load Balancing automatically reroutes the traffic to the remaining running EC2 instances. If the failed EC2 instance is restored, Elastic Load Balancing restores the traffic to that instance. Elastic Load Balancing offers clients a single point of contact, and it can also serve as the first line of defense against attacks on your network. You can offload the work of encryption and decryption to Elastic Load Balancing, so your servers can focus on their main task.

Amazon API Gateway

Amazon API Gateway

Amazon API Gateway handles all the tasks involved in accepting and processing up to hundreds of thousands of concurrent API calls, including traffic management, authorization and access control, monitoring, and API version management.

Tyk Cloud

Tyk Cloud

Tyk is a leading Open Source API Gateway and Management Platform, featuring an API gateway, analytics, developer portal and dashboard. We power billions of transactions for thousands of innovative organisations.

Fly

Fly

Deploy apps through our global load balancer with minimal shenanigans. All Fly-enabled applications get free SSL certificates, accept traffic through our global network of datacenters, and encrypt all traffic from visitors through to application servers.

Envoy

Envoy

Originally built at Lyft, Envoy is a high performance C++ distributed proxy designed for single services and applications, as well as a communication bus and “universal data plane” designed for large microservice “service mesh” architectures.

Moesif

Moesif

Build a winning API platform with instant, meaningful visibility into API usage and customer adoption

Hipache

Hipache

Hipache is a distributed proxy designed to route high volumes of http and websocket traffic to unusually large numbers of virtual hosts, in a highly dynamic topology where backends are added and removed several times per second. It is particularly well-suited for PaaS (platform-as-a-service) and other environments that are both business-critical and multi-tenant.

Ambassador

Ambassador

Map services to arbitrary URLs in a single, declarative YAML file. Configure routes with CORS support, circuit breakers, timeouts, and more. Replace your Kubernetes ingress controller. Route gRPC, WebSockets, or HTTP.

node-http-proxy

node-http-proxy

node-http-proxy is an HTTP programmable proxying library that supports websockets. It is suitable for implementing components such as proxies and load balancers.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

Postman
Swagger UI

Postman vs Swagger UI

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp