← Docs ← Home
Auth0 Comparison

HODLXXI vs Auth0: Honest Comparison

This is an honest comparison, not a sales pitch.

We respect Auth0 (now Okta). They've built a solid product used by thousands of companies.

HODLXXI is different, not necessarily better.

TL;DR

Use Auth0 if: - You need production-ready auth today - You need enterprise support and SLAs - You want proven, battle-tested software - You need social login (Google, Facebook, etc.) - You're building for mainstream users

Use HODLXXI if: - You're building a Bitcoin-native app - You're comfortable with experimental software - Your users already have Bitcoin wallets - You value self-custody and decentralization - You're willing to accept beta risks

Side-by-Side Comparison

Feature Auth0 HODLXXI
Status Production-ready Beta (experimental)
Founded 2013 2024
Company Okta (public) Solo developer
Users Millions 47 (testing)
Pricing $25-$240+/mo Free (beta), $29-$99/mo (planned)
SLA 99.9% None yet
Support 24/7 enterprise Best-effort email
Auth Methods Password, social, MFA Bitcoin signatures, LNURL, Nostr
Custody Manages credentials Self-custodial only
Data Collection Analytics, tracking Minimal (pseudonymous)
Compliance SOC 2, GDPR, etc. None yet
API REST + SDKs REST (OAuth2/OIDC)
Integrations 100+ Bitcoin, Lightning, Nostr
Docs Extensive Complete but new
Open Source No Yes (MIT)

Authentication Methods

Auth0 Supports:

  • Username + password
  • Social login (Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.)
  • SMS MFA
  • TOTP MFA (Google Authenticator)
  • WebAuthn / FIDO2
  • Enterprise SSO (SAML, OIDC)
  • Passwordless (magic links, SMS)

HODLXXI Supports:

  • Bitcoin signature authentication
  • LNURL-auth (Lightning)
  • Nostr identity (NIP-07)
  • Hardware wallet signing (Ledger, Trezor)
  • Time-locked covenants (optional)

Key Difference: - Auth0: Many auth methods for mainstream users - HODLXXI: Bitcoin-only for crypto-native users

Architecture

Auth0

  • Centralized: Auth0 hosts everything
  • Proprietary: Closed source
  • Cloud: AWS infrastructure
  • Database: Auth0 manages user data
  • Trust model: Trust Auth0

HODLXXI

  • Decentralized: Bitcoin blockchain as source of truth
  • Open source: Code on GitHub
  • Self-hosted capable: Can run your own
  • Database: Minimal (only caching, not source of truth)
  • Trust model: Verify cryptographically

User Experience

Auth0

Pros: - Familiar username/password flow - Social login (one-click with Google/Facebook) - Well-designed UI components - Works for non-technical users

Cons: - Users must trust Auth0 with credentials - Password reset flows required - Account recovery can be complex

HODLXXI

Pros: - No passwords to remember or leak - No email required - No account recovery needed (you control keys) - Works across apps (same Bitcoin identity)

Cons: - Users must manage private keys - Requires Bitcoin wallet - Harder for non-technical users - Key loss = permanent lockout

Security Model

Auth0

  • Perimeter security: Strong firewalls, monitoring
  • Credential storage: Hashed passwords in database
  • Breaches: If Auth0 is breached, credentials at risk
  • MFA: Available but optional
  • Audits: Regular security audits

HODLXXI

  • Cryptographic: No credentials stored
  • Signature verification: Each login requires valid signature
  • Breaches: Server breach doesn't expose keys (users hold keys)
  • MFA: Not needed (private key = authentication)
  • Audits: Not yet (planned for v1.0)

Neither is "more secure" — they have different threat models.

Privacy

Auth0

  • Collects: Email, name, IP, device info
  • Uses for: Analytics, fraud detection, support
  • Shares with: Limited third parties
  • GDPR: Compliant
  • Tracking: Yes (product analytics)

HODLXXI

  • Collects: Minimal (only Bitcoin addresses, pseudonymous)
  • Uses for: Authentication only
  • Shares with: No one
  • GDPR: Not applicable (no PII collected)
  • Tracking: None

Developer Experience

Auth0

Pros: - Extensive docs - Many SDKs (JS, Python, Go, etc.) - Active community - Lots of examples - Quickstart guides

Cons: - Complex pricing tiers - Vendor lock-in (migration difficult) - Dashboard can be overwhelming

HODLXXI

Pros: - Standard OAuth2/OIDC (easy integration) - Simple API - Open source (fork if needed) - No vendor lock-in - Transparent pricing

Cons: - New docs (less examples) - Small community - Beta stability - Fewer SDKs (just REST API)

Pricing Comparison

Auth0

  • Free: 7,500 MAU (monthly active users)
  • Essential: $35/mo (start) + $0.05/MAU
  • Professional: $240/mo (start) + $0.13/MAU
  • Enterprise: Custom pricing

Example: 10,000 MAU = ~$250-600/mo

HODLXXI

  • Free: 1,000 MAU (always free)
  • Developer: $29/mo (10,000 MAU)
  • Professional: $99/mo (100,000 MAU)

Example: 10,000 MAU = $29/mo

But: - HODLXXI has no SLA (Auth0 does) - HODLXXI is beta (Auth0 is production) - HODLXXI has minimal support (Auth0 has 24/7)

You get what you pay for.

Compliance & Certifications

Auth0

✅ SOC 2 Type II ✅ GDPR compliant ✅ HIPAA (BAA available) ✅ ISO 27001 ✅ PCI DSS (certain features)

HODLXXI

❌ No certifications yet ⚠️ Not audited ⚠️ Not GDPR-relevant (no PII) ⚠️ Not HIPAA ⚠️ Not ISO 27001

If you need compliance, use Auth0.

Use Cases

Auth0 is Better For:

  • E-commerce sites
  • SaaS products for mainstream users
  • Enterprise B2B applications
  • Apps requiring social login
  • Regulated industries (healthcare, finance)
  • Teams wanting support contracts

HODLXXI is Better For:

  • Bitcoin wallets
  • Lightning Network apps
  • Nostr clients
  • DeFi interfaces
  • Bitcoin-only services
  • Developers who want full control
  • Open-source projects

Migration

From Auth0 to HODLXXI:

  • Possible, but requires user re-enrollment
  • No password migration (different auth model)
  • OAuth2 endpoints similar (easier integration)

From HODLXXI to Auth0:

  • Possible, but users need new credentials
  • Bitcoin identity doesn't transfer
  • Standard OAuth migration path

Both directions require user action.

Roadmap

Auth0 Future:

  • Continued enterprise features
  • More integrations
  • Okta platform consolidation
  • Enterprise focus

HODLXXI Future (Planned):

  • Lightning integration
  • Hardware wallet support
  • Security audit
  • v1.0 (exit beta)
  • Multi-sig auth

Auth0's roadmap is more certain. HODLXXI's may change.

Red Flags (Be Honest)

Auth0 Red Flags:

  • Pricing can get expensive at scale
  • Vendor lock-in (hard to migrate away)
  • Okta acquisition changes (uncertain future)
  • Privacy concerns (data collection)

HODLXXI Red Flags:

  • Beta software (biggest risk)
  • No track record
  • Solo developer (bus factor = 1)
  • May shut down or pivot
  • No SLA or guarantees

When to Choose What

Choose Auth0 if you answer "yes" to any:

  • [ ] I need production-ready auth right now
  • [ ] I need social login
  • [ ] My users are non-technical
  • [ ] I need compliance certifications
  • [ ] I need 24/7 support
  • [ ] I have budget for auth ($100-500/mo)

Choose HODLXXI if you answer "yes" to all:

  • [x] My app is Bitcoin-native
  • [x] My users have Bitcoin wallets
  • [x] I'm comfortable with beta risks
  • [x] I value self-custody and decentralization
  • [x] I can handle experimental software
  • [x] I don't need compliance certs yet

Can You Use Both?

Yes.

Many developers use: - Auth0 for mainstream users - HODLXXI for Bitcoin power users

Example:

if (user.hasBitcoinWallet) {
  useBitcoinAuth() // HODLXXI
} else {
  usePasswordAuth() // Auth0
}

This gives users choice.

Final Verdict

Auth0 is the mature, proven choice.
If you need production-ready auth today, use Auth0.

HODLXXI is the experimental alternative.
If you're building Bitcoin-native and can handle beta risk, try HODLXXI.

Neither is objectively "better."
They solve different problems for different users.

Questions?

  • Auth0 questions: → auth0.com/docs
  • HODLXXI questions: → hodlxxi.com/docs/faq

We don't trash-talk Auth0.
They've built something valuable.

We're just exploring a different approach.

Last updated: December 2024 This comparison will be updated as HODLXXI matures