OneckPass vs Bitwarden: Full Comparison 2026
Honest comparison between OneckPass and Bitwarden. Both are excellent password managers, but with different approaches: Bitwarden is open source and technical, OneckPass focuses on user-friendly UX and pricing in BRL. Find out which one is right for you.
OneckPass vs Bitwarden: Full Comparison 2026
Let's be honest from the start: Bitwarden is one of the best password managers on the market. Open source, audited, with a robust free plan and affordable pricing. Any comparison that tries to diminish it would be dishonest.
That said, there are scenarios where OneckPass may be a more suitable choice, and vice versa. This article proposes a technical and honest comparison between the two, so you can make the best decision for your case.
Overview
Bitwarden
Founded in 2016 by Kyle Spearrin, Bitwarden is an open source password manager licensed under AGPL-3.0. Its source code is available on GitHub, and the company conducts regular audits with Cure53, one of the most respected security firms in the world. It offers a free plan with unlimited password storage, which has made it extremely popular among technical users.
OneckPass
OneckPass is a zero-knowledge password manager with end-to-end encryption, developed with a focus on accessible user experience and adapted to the Brazilian market. It offers pricing in Brazilian Real, payment via PIX, and native Portuguese support. Available on Web, Chrome, Firefox, iOS, Android, macOS, and Windows.
Security Comparison
Security is where both shine, but with slightly different technical approaches:
| Criterion | OneckPass | Bitwarden |
|---|---|---|
| Encryption | AES-256-GCM | AES-256-CBC + HMAC-SHA256 |
| Key Derivation | Argon2id | Argon2id (also supports PBKDF2) |
| Architecture | Zero-knowledge | Zero-knowledge |
| Code | Closed | Open source (AGPL-3.0) |
| Audits | In planning | Cure53 (multiple public audits) |
| Self-hosting | Not available | Yes (Vaultwarden/official) |
Relevant Technical Differences
Encryption: GCM vs CBC
OneckPass uses AES-256-GCM (Galois/Counter Mode), while Bitwarden uses AES-256-CBC (Cipher Block Chaining) combined with HMAC-SHA256 for authentication.
In practice, both modes are secure and widely used. The difference is that GCM is an authenticated encryption mode (AEAD), which combines encryption and integrity verification in a single operation. CBC with HMAC achieves the same result, but in two separate steps, which historically has been more susceptible to implementation errors (such as padding oracle attacks, although Bitwarden mitigates this correctly).
AES-256-GCM is considered the most modern standard and is NIST's current recommendation for new systems.
Open Source vs Closed Source
This is a point where Bitwarden has a clear and undeniable advantage. Open source code allows:
- Independent auditing by any researcher
- Full transparency about how data is handled
- Possibility of self-hosting for total control
OneckPass operates with closed source code. While this does not mean it is less secure (the zero-knowledge architecture ensures the server never accesses plaintext data), the inability for independent auditing is a real limitation that should be considered.
Self-Hosting
Bitwarden offers a self-hosting option, both through the official version and the popular Vaultwarden alternative. For organizations that require total control over infrastructure, this is a significant differentiator.
OneckPass does not currently offer self-hosting.
If code transparency and self-hosting are non-negotiable requirements for you, Bitwarden is the right choice. If you are looking for a more user-friendly experience with pricing in BRL, keep reading.
Price Comparison
| Plan | OneckPass | Bitwarden |
|---|---|---|
| Free | 50 items, 2 vaults, 50MB, TOTP | Unlimited (passwords and devices) |
| Individual | R$ 9.90/month or R$ 99/year | US$ 1.65/month (~R$ 9.60/month) |
| Family | R$ 19.90/month or R$ 199/year (6 users) | US$ 3.99/month (~R$ 23/month) for 6 users |
| Business | R$ 29.90/user/month | US$ 4-6/user/month (~R$ 23-35) |
| Payment | PIX, card, boleto | Credit card |
Price Analysis
Bitwarden's free plan is more generous, with unlimited password storage. OneckPass's is limited to 50 items, which is sufficient for many users, but not for all.
On paid plans, prices are very close: OneckPass Premium costs R$ 9.90/month, and Bitwarden Premium costs US$ 1.65/month (~R$ 9.60 in direct conversion). However, Bitwarden charges in dollars, which implies:
- 4.38% IOF tax on the transaction
- Possible exchange rate spread from the card
- Need for an international credit card
OneckPass charges in Brazilian Real and accepts PIX and boleto, which is a practical advantage for those without an international card or who prefer to avoid foreign currency transactions.
User Experience Comparison
This is where the two products differ the most.
Bitwarden: Functional, but Technical
Bitwarden is built by and for people who value functionality over aesthetics. The interface is functional and complete, but it can seem intimidating for someone who has never used a password manager. Technical terms appear frequently, and the initial setup may require some prior knowledge.
For technical users, this is not a problem; for the general public, it can be a barrier to adoption.
OneckPass: Accessible and Modern
OneckPass was designed with a focus on accessibility for all user profiles. The interface is clean, modern, and guides the user step by step. Organization with vaults and folders is intuitive, and features like TOTP, sharing, and emergency contacts are accessible without the need for technical documentation.
This does not mean OneckPass is oversimplified; it means that complexity is available for those who need it, without being imposed on those who don't.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | OneckPass | Bitwarden |
|---|---|---|
| Item types | Login, Card, Note, Identity | Login, Card, Note, Identity |
| Vaults | Yes | Yes (Collections) |
| Folders | Yes | Yes |
| Sharing | Yes | Yes (Send / Organizations) |
| Emergency Contacts | Yes | Yes |
| Import/Export | Yes | Yes |
| Security Report | Yes | Yes (Vault Health Reports) |
| Breach Monitoring | Yes (Premium) | Yes (Premium) |
| TOTP | Yes (including Free plan) | Yes (Premium only) |
| Passkeys | On roadmap | Yes |
| Self-hosting | No | Yes |
| CLI | In development | Yes |
| API | Yes (Business plan) | Yes |
| SSO | Yes (Business plan) | Yes (Enterprise) |
| Audit Logs | Yes (Teams plan) | Yes (Enterprise) |
Highlight: TOTP on the Free Plan
A notable difference: OneckPass includes TOTP (integrated two-factor authentication) on the free plan. In Bitwarden, integrated TOTP is an exclusive Premium feature. If you use two-factor authentication and don't want to pay for a separate app, this is a point to consider.
Available Platforms
| Platform | OneckPass | Bitwarden |
|---|---|---|
| Web | Yes | Yes |
| Chrome | Yes | Yes |
| Firefox | Yes | Yes |
| Safari | Coming soon | Yes |
| Edge | Via Chrome Extension | Yes |
| iOS | Yes | Yes |
| Android | Yes | Yes |
| macOS | Yes | Yes |
| Windows | Yes | Yes |
| Linux | Coming soon | Yes |
| CLI | In development | Yes |
Bitwarden has the advantage in platform coverage, with Safari, Linux, and CLI support already available.
Support and Language
| Criterion | OneckPass | Bitwarden |
|---|---|---|
| PT-BR Interface | Native | Community translation |
| Support in Portuguese | Yes | Limited (English primary) |
| PT-BR Documentation | Yes | Partial |
OneckPass was built with Brazilian Portuguese as its primary language. Bitwarden offers community translation, which is good but may have inconsistencies or delays compared to the original English content.
Who Should Choose Bitwarden?
Bitwarden is ideal if you:
- Value open source code as a security requirement
- Need self-hosting for total data control
- Want a free plan with unlimited passwords
- Are a technical user comfortable with more functional interfaces
- Need CLI for automation
- Already use and trust the Bitwarden ecosystem
Who Should Choose OneckPass?
OneckPass is ideal if you:
- Prefer a more intuitive and user-friendly interface
- Want to pay in Brazilian Real (BRL) via PIX or boleto
- Value native Portuguese support
- Want free TOTP without needing a separate app
- Want a modern native desktop app for macOS/Windows
- Are in Brazil and prefer to avoid international transactions
The Honest Opinion
If you are an IT professional or developer who values open source and self-hosting, Bitwarden is probably the best choice. Its commitment to transparency is genuine and admirable.
If you are looking for a more polished experience, with native support in your language and pricing in local currency, OneckPass offers a different but equally solid value proposition. AES-256-GCM encryption with Argon2id is, from a technical standpoint, as secure as Bitwarden's, and in terms of mode of operation, more modern.
Both are excellent choices. The best one for you depends on your priorities.
Want to try OneckPass? Create your free account and test it for yourself. If you prefer Bitwarden, that's fine too. The important thing is to use a password manager.