What’s the Difference Between Kyverno and OPA Gatekeeper?

What’s the Difference Between Kyverno and OPA Gatekeeper? High-Level Difference Between Kyverno and OPA Gatekeeper Policy Language: YAML vs Rego Kubernetes-Native by Design Built-In Mutation and Resource Generation Developer Experience and Adoption Operational Simplicity at Scale Kyverno vs OPA Gatekeeper: Feature Comparison When Kyverno Is the Better Choice Where OPA Gatekeeper Still Fits Kyverno’s Origin: Built by Kubernetes Practitioners Final Takeaway Kyverno Works Best with Nirmata When evaluating Kubernetes policy engines, Kyverno and OPA Gatekeeper are often compared. While both enable Policy as Code, Kyverno was purpose-built for Kubernetes , while OPA Gatekeeper adapts a general-purpose policy engine for Kubernetes use. For most DevOps and platform teams, that distinction matters. Kyverno’s Kubernetes-native design, YAML-based policies, and built-in mutation and generation capabilities make it the preferred choice for teams that want strong governance without slowing down development. At a glance, both tools enforce policies through Kubernetes admission control. The difference lies in how those policies are written, managed, and adopted. Kyverno focuses on Kubernetes-native simplicity and developer experience. PA Gatekeeper focuses on flexible, logic-heavy policies using the Rego language. For Kubernetes-centric teams, Kyverno aligns more naturally with existing workflows. Kyverno policies are written in standard Kubernetes YAML. This allows DevOps teams to define policies using the same syntax and structure they already use for manifests, Helm charts, and GitOps pipelines. OPA Gatekeeper uses Rego , a specialized policy language.