Comparing different auth providers for your Next.js application

Authentication is one of those things you can’t skip in a production app, but you can avoid building it from scratch.

With Next.js, we have a buffet of ready-to-use auth providers — but each one has a different flavor, price tag, and setup complexity.

Let’s break them down.

1. Clerk

Tagline: Auth, user management, and UI — all in one box.

Best for: Teams who want a full-stack auth solution with drop-in components.

Pros

• Prebuilt UI: Sign-in, sign-up, and profile pages are ready. Theme them and ship.
• Multi-channel login: Email, passwordless, social logins, Web3 wallets, OTP.
• User management dashboard: Edit user data without touching the DB.
• Granular session control: Useful for multi-device logout or token refresh.

Cons

• Paid after free tier (2,000 monthly active users).
• Less customizable on backend logic compared to rolling your own.

Integration in Next.js:

npm install @clerk/nextjs

Wrap your app in <ClerkProvider> and use useUser() in components — takes ~15 mins.

2. Firebase Authentication

Tagline: Google’s all-in-one backend for small-to-mid apps.

Best for: Startups already using Firebase for DB, storage, or analytics.

Pros

• Zero server needed: Auth runs on Firebase infra.
• Passwordless & social providers: Email, Google, Facebook, Apple, etc.
• Realtime database synergy: Works great with Firestore.
• Free tier is generous (50k MAUs).

Cons

• Limited customization of auth flows.
• Vendor lock-in — migrating away is painful.
• Managing SSR sessions in Next.js is trickier.

Integration in Next.js:

You’ll need to set up Firebase client SDK and bridge it with Next.js API routes for SSR-friendly JWT validation.

3. Supabase Auth

Tagline: Open-source Firebase alternative with PostgreSQL.

Best for: Teams who want SQL + auth + storage without Google lock-in.

Pros

• Postgres-based: Data and auth in one DB.
• JWT baked in: Great for APIs.
• Easy RLS integration: Fine-grained access control in SQL.
• Free self-hosting option.

Cons

• UI for auth is basic — you’ll build your own forms.
• Social provider support not as wide as Firebase/Clerk.
• Email deliverability depends on your SMTP config.

Integration in Next.js:

npm install @supabase/supabase-js

You’ll likely set up middleware to refresh tokens on SSR and secure API routes.

4. NextAuth.js

Tagline: Auth for Next.js, built by the Next.js community.

Best for: Maximum flexibility with minimal vendor lock-in.

Pros

• SSR-native: Built for Next.js routing and middleware.
• Dozens of providers: Google, GitHub, Twitter, credentials, etc.
• Database-agnostic: Store sessions wherever you want.

Cons

• You manage your own UI and backend DB.
• Scaling session storage needs thought (e.g., Redis).
• Social logins require manual provider setup.

Integration in Next.js:

npm install next-auth

Add /pages/api/auth/[...nextauth].ts and configure providers — you’re in full control.

5. Auth0

Tagline: Enterprise-grade identity management.

Best for: Apps with strict security/compliance needs (SOC 2, HIPAA, etc.).

Pros

• Enterprise SSO: SAML, Okta, Azure AD.
• Extensible rules: Add custom logic in the login pipeline.
• Great dashboards & analytics.

Cons

• Pricing jumps fast after free tier (7k MAUs).
• SDK feels heavy for simple apps.

Integration in Next.js:

Auth0’s Next.js SDK makes SSR easy, but expect a longer setup.

6. BetterAuth

Tagline: The most comprehensive authentication framework for TypeScript.

Best for: Developers who want to own their auth infrastructure with full control and TypeScript-first approach.

Pros

• Framework agnostic: Works with React, Vue, Svelte, Astro, Solid, Next.js, Nuxt, and more.
• TypeScript-first: Full type safety with auto-generated schemas for users, sessions, etc.
• Plugin ecosystem: Extensible with official and community plugins for advanced features.
• Multi-tenant support: Built-in organization, teams, and invitation system with access control.
• Two-factor authentication: Secure MFA implementation with minimal code.
• Database agnostic: Works with any database through adapters.

Cons

• Requires more initial setup compared to SaaS solutions.
• You manage your own infrastructure and scaling.
• No prebuilt UI components — you build your own forms.

Integration in Next.js:

npm add better-auth

Set up your database schema and configure the auth instance — you own the entire auth stack.

Side-by-Side Snapshot

Which One Should You Pick?

• Go Clerk if you want to ship auth in hours with a good UI.
• Go Firebase if you’re already on Google’s stack and don’t mind lock-in.
• Go Supabase if you love SQL and open source.
• Go NextAuth.js if you want fine-grained control and don’t mind writing UI.
• Go Auth0 if compliance and enterprise features are non-negotiable.
• Go BetterAuth if you want to own your auth infrastructure with full TypeScript control.

💡 Pro tip: If your app is analytics-heavy or integrates AI features like with Hyperlook, pick a provider that works well with server-side sessions so you can pass auth context to backend event processing without breaking SSR.

Benchmarks

Here’s a more quantitative look at each provider

(Numbers are approximate, based on average setup times & developer experience reports)

Interpretation:

• Fastest to integrate: Clerk (if UI is fine as-is).
• Most control: NextAuth.js (but more initial effort).
• Best balance of speed + control: Supabase.
• Best enterprise compliance: Auth0.
• Best free scale: Firebase (50k MAUs).
• Best TypeScript experience: BetterAuth (with full ownership).

Additional Metrics for Developer Experience