--- title: "Apache APISIX vs Kong (2026): API Gateways Compared - API7.ai" description: "Apache APISIX vs Kong compared: architecture, performance, plugins, protocols, security, and open-source vs Enterprise gating — and how to choose." url: "https://api7.ai/apisix-vs-kong" --- # Apache APISIX vs Kong: API Gateways Compared (2026) By API7.ai Team Last updated: July 2026 Apache APISIX and Kong are both open-source API gateways built on NGINX/OpenResty, but they differ in configuration store, how much ships in open source, and how config propagates. This guide compares architecture, performance, plugins, protocols, security, and licensing so you can choose the right gateway. TL;DR Both gateways share an NGINX/OpenResty core. Apache APISIX is etcd-based (no database), propagates config in milliseconds, keeps routing, plugins, the dashboard, and AI in an Apache-2.0 open-source core, and is governed by the vendor-neutral Apache Software Foundation with a 600+ contributor community. Kong is PostgreSQL-backed (or DB-less) with a large plugin ecosystem and a managed Konnect platform, but is governed by a single vendor and gates several advanced features behind Kong Enterprise. - A fully open, database-free, dynamic gateway: Apache APISIX - The largest ecosystem + a managed SaaS: Kong - Plugins in Go/Java/Python/Wasm or broad protocols: Apache APISIX - [At a glance](#at-a-glance) - [What is APISIX?](#what-is-apisix) - [What is Kong?](#what-is-kong) - [Architecture](#architecture) - [Performance](#performance) - [Feature comparison](#feature-comparison) - [When to choose](#choose) - [FAQ](#faq) ## Apache APISIX vs Kong at a glance APISIX leads on open-source scope (everything in the core), a database-free etcd architecture, and millisecond dynamic config; Kong leads on ecosystem size and a managed Konnect platform. | Dimension | Apache APISIX | Kong | | ---------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Best for | A fully open-source, dynamic, high-performance gateway | A mature ecosystem with a managed Konnect platform | | Core & config store | NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + etcd — no database | NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + PostgreSQL or DB-less | | Open-source scope | ✓ Routing, plugins, dashboard, AI — all Apache-2.0 | Apache-2.0 gateway core; OIDC, advanced AI, advanced RL, RBAC are Enterprise | | Plugins | 100+ fully open-source plugins | 100+ on the Plugin Hub; many advanced ones Enterprise | | Config propagation | ✓ Dynamic via etcd watch (ms) | \~5s DB poll; DB-less needs reload | | Plugin languages | Lua, Go, Java, Python, WebAssembly | Lua, Go, Python, JavaScript (PDK); Wasm (beta) | | Governance & community | ✓ Apache Software Foundation (vendor-neutral); 600+ contributors | Single vendor — Kong Inc. controls roadmap and maintainership | ## What is Apache APISIX? Apache APISIX is an Apache-2.0, etcd-based API gateway on NGINX/OpenResty, with 100+ open-source plugins, multi-language plugin support, and a built-in AI/LLM gateway. Apache APISIX is an open-source, dynamic API gateway built on NGINX/OpenResty with an etcd configuration store. It is an Apache Software Foundation top-level project under Apache-2.0, with 100+ plugins, multi-language plugin support, and a built-in AI/LLM gateway — all in the open-source core. Core NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + etcd License Apache-2.0 (ASF top-level project) Best for A fully open, dynamic, fast gateway ### Pros - Fully open source — routing, plugins, dashboard, and AI with no Enterprise paywall - etcd-backed: no database, millisecond dynamic config with no restart - Plugins in Lua, Go, Java, Python, and WebAssembly - Broad protocol support incl. HTTP/3, gRPC, MQTT, and Dubbo - Vendor-neutral ASF governance — 600+ contributors per the ASF project spotlight ### Cons - Smaller commercial-support ecosystem than Kong (API7 provides it) - Fewer turnkey managed-SaaS options than Kong Konnect - Some capabilities are configured rather than packaged like Kong Enterprise ## What is Kong? Kong Gateway is an open-source API gateway on NGINX/OpenResty backed by PostgreSQL (or DB-less), with a large Plugin Hub and commercial Kong Enterprise / Konnect offerings on top. Kong Gateway is an open-source API gateway built on NGINX/OpenResty, backed by PostgreSQL or run DB-less, with a large plugin ecosystem. Kong Inc. layers Kong Enterprise and the managed Kong Konnect platform on top of the open-source core. Core NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + PostgreSQL / DB-less License Apache-2.0 core + commercial Enterprise Best for Mature ecosystem + managed Konnect ### Pros - Mature, widely adopted, with a large Plugin Hub (100+ listings) - Managed Konnect SaaS and a strong commercial-support ecosystem - Flexible deployment: traditional, DB-less, and hybrid modes ### Cons - OIDC, advanced AI Gateway plugins, advanced rate limiting, and RBAC/workspaces are Enterprise-only - DB-backed config propagates on a \~5s poll; DB-less requires reloads - Cassandra was removed in Kong 3.4 (PostgreSQL or DB-less now) ## Architecture: etcd vs database-backed APISIX separates a stateless data plane from an etcd config store, so changes propagate by watch in milliseconds with no restart. Kong persists state in PostgreSQL (or runs DB-less from a declarative file). Apache APISIX stores all configuration in etcd and caches it locally on each node. Routes, plugins, and upstreams update via etcd watch in milliseconds, with no database to scale and no restart. The data plane is stateless and scales horizontally without a relational-database bottleneck. Kong runs in traditional mode backed by PostgreSQL, in DB-less mode from a declarative config file, or in hybrid mode separating control and data planes. In traditional mode, nodes pick up changes on a polling interval (the documented `db_update_frequency` default is 5 seconds); DB-less applies changes on reload. Cassandra was removed as a datastore in Kong Gateway 3.4. ## Performance Both are NGINX-based and perform in the same class. API7's published benchmark puts APISIX ahead of Kong; APISIX self-reports \~18,000 QPS per core at 0.2 ms — treat vendor numbers as directional. Because both gateways run on NGINX/OpenResty, raw proxying is comparable. In [API7's published APISIX 3.0 vs Kong 3.0 benchmark](https://api7.ai/blog/apisix-kong-3-0-performance-comparison), Apache APISIX reached roughly 140% of Kong's throughput without plugins and about 200% with plugins enabled, and APISIX's own documentation reports a single-core throughput of about 18,000 QPS at 0.2 ms average latency. These are vendor-published figures — treat them as directional and benchmark your own workload, since plugin configuration dominates real-world results. ## Apache APISIX vs Kong: feature comparison The two converge on NGINX-based proxying, then diverge on config store, what ships in open source vs Enterprise, plugin languages, and protocol breadth. | Feature | Apache APISIX | Kong | | --------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | | Architecture | NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + etcd; stateless data plane, dynamic config, no database | NGINX/OpenResty (Lua) + PostgreSQL, or DB-less; hybrid mode separates CP/DP | | Config propagation | etcd watch — milliseconds, no restart | Traditional mode polls the DB (\~5s default); DB-less applies on reload | | Open-source license & scope | Apache-2.0 — routing, plugins, dashboard, observability, AI all in OSS | Apache-2.0 gateway core; OIDC, advanced AI Gateway plugins, advanced rate limiting, and RBAC/workspaces are Enterprise | | Plugins | 100+ plugins, all fully open source (no paywall) | Bundled OSS plugins + 100+ on the Plugin Hub; many advanced plugins Enterprise | | Custom plugin languages | Lua (native), Go, Java, Python, WebAssembly | Lua (native), Go, Python, JavaScript (PDK); Wasm (beta, 3.4+) | | Protocols | HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, HTTP/3, gRPC (+ transcoding), WebSocket, TCP/UDP, MQTT, Dubbo | HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, gRPC, WebSocket, TCP/TLS, UDP | | Security & auth | JWT, OAuth2/OIDC, key-auth, mTLS, HMAC — in the open-source core | JWT, OAuth2, key-auth, ACL, mTLS in OSS; OIDC and mTLS-auth are Enterprise | | AI / LLM gateway | ✓ AI/LLM proxy plugins in the open-source core | Kong AI Gateway plugins — advanced ones require Enterprise | | Service discovery | Kubernetes, Consul, Nacos, Eureka, DNS | DNS and Kubernetes; other registries via plugins | | Kubernetes | APISIX Ingress Controller + Gateway API; etcd-based, no database | Kong Ingress Controller; can run DB-less in Kubernetes | | Dashboard | ✓ Built-in open-source dashboard | Kong Manager GUI; full management via Konnect (commercial) | | Observability | Prometheus, OpenTelemetry, SkyWalking, Datadog — in OSS | Prometheus and basics in OSS; full suite in Enterprise | | Governance & community | Vendor-neutral ASF top-level project; 600+ contributors (per the ASF project spotlight) | Single-vendor project — Kong Inc. sets roadmap and maintainership | | License & pricing | Apache-2.0, free forever; API7 Enterprise adds support, RBAC, and a hardened build | OSS free; Kong Enterprise and Konnect are custom-priced (contact sales) | ## When to choose Apache APISIX vs Kong Choose APISIX for a fully open, database-free, dynamic gateway; choose Kong for the largest ecosystem and a managed Konnect platform. ### Choose Apache APISIX if you… - Want every capability — routing, plugins, dashboard, AI — in an open-source core - Want a database-free, etcd-based gateway with millisecond dynamic config - Need broad protocol support or plugins in Go, Java, Python, or Wasm - Prefer vendor-neutral Apache governance ### Choose Kong if you… - Want the largest plugin ecosystem and a managed Konnect SaaS - Are comfortable adopting Kong Enterprise for advanced features - Have standardized on Kong tooling across your organization **Bottom line:** if you want every capability in an open-source core, a database-free architecture, and millisecond dynamic config, Apache APISIX is the stronger fit; if you want the largest plugin ecosystem and a managed SaaS and are comfortable with Kong Enterprise, Kong is a solid choice. For a production-hardened APISIX distribution with a dashboard, RBAC, FIPS 140-2, and commercial support, see [API7 Enterprise](https://api7.ai/enterprise). If you plan to keep operating the open-source gateway but need help with deployment, upgrades, or architecture review, consider [commercial support for Apache APISIX](https://api7.ai/apache-apisix-enterprise-support). ## Frequently asked questions ### Is Apache APISIX faster than Kong? Both are built on NGINX/OpenResty, so raw proxying is in the same class. In API7's published APISIX 3.0 vs Kong 3.0 benchmark, APISIX reached roughly 140% of Kong's throughput without plugins and about 200% with plugins enabled; Apache APISIX self-reports a single-core throughput of \~18,000 QPS at 0.2 ms average latency. Treat vendor benchmarks as directional and benchmark your own workload. ### What is the main difference between Apache APISIX and Kong? Apache APISIX stores configuration in etcd (no relational database) and keeps routing, plugins, the dashboard, and its AI/LLM gateway in the Apache-2.0 open-source core, governed by the vendor-neutral Apache Software Foundation. Kong is backed by PostgreSQL (or runs DB-less), is governed by a single vendor (Kong Inc.), and gates several capabilities — OpenID Connect, the advanced AI Gateway plugins, advanced rate limiting, and RBAC/workspaces — behind Kong Enterprise, with a managed Konnect platform on top. ### Who governs Apache APISIX and Kong? Apache APISIX is a top-level project of the vendor-neutral Apache Software Foundation — the ASF’s official project spotlight highlights a community of 600+ contributors, 13k+ GitHub stars, and 6M+ downloads. Kong Gateway is developed and governed by a single company, Kong Inc., which controls its roadmap and maintainership. For long-lived infrastructure, foundation governance means no single vendor can re-license the core or move it behind a paywall. ### Is Apache APISIX fully open source? Yes. Apache APISIX is an Apache Software Foundation top-level project under the Apache-2.0 license. Its routing, 100+ plugins, dashboard, observability, and AI/LLM gateway are all in the open-source core, with no enterprise paywall on the data plane. API7 offers commercial support and a hardened distribution (API7 Enterprise) on top. ### Does Kong require a database? Kong runs in traditional mode backed by PostgreSQL, or DB-less from a declarative config file (with hybrid mode separating control and data planes). Cassandra was removed in Kong Gateway 3.4. Apache APISIX uses etcd as its configuration store and needs no relational database. ### Which has more plugins, APISIX or Kong? Kong has a large Plugin Hub (100+ listings including partner/3rd-party plugins), but many advanced ones require Kong Enterprise. Apache APISIX ships 100+ plugins that are all fully open source, and supports custom plugins in Lua, Go, Java, Python, and WebAssembly. ### APISIX or Kong for Kubernetes? Both provide a Kubernetes Ingress Controller. Apache APISIX supports the Gateway API and runs on its etcd-based architecture with no database to operate; Kong offers the Kong Ingress Controller and can run DB-less in Kubernetes. APISIX adds built-in service discovery from Kubernetes, Consul, Nacos, Eureka, and DNS. ## Related comparisons [Apache APISIX vs NGINX](https://api7.ai/apisix-vs-nginx) · [Kong vs Traefik](https://api7.ai/kong-vs-traefik) · [All gateway comparisons](https://api7.ai/api-gateway-comparison) ## Ready to get started? For more information about full API lifecycle management, please contact us to Meet with our API Experts. [Contact Us](https://api7.ai/contact)