Cloudify offers seamless orchestration and infrastructure deployment across major cloud platforms such as AWS, Azure, and VMware. Its TOSCA-based standard provides flexibility and integration capabilities, making it an effective tool for multi-cloud operations and infrastructure-as-code management.
| Product | Mindshare (%) |
|---|---|
| Cloudify | 1.5% |
| VMware Aria Automation | 5.5% |
| IBM Turbonomic | 4.7% |
| Other | 88.3% |
| Type | Title | Date | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Category | Cloud Management | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Product | Reviews, tips, and advice from real users | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Cloudify vs VMware Aria Operations | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Cloudify vs Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Comparison | Cloudify vs VMware Aria Automation | Jun 23, 2026 | Download |
| Title | Rating | Mindshare | Recommending | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Snyk | 4.1 | 1.8% | 100% | 51 interviewsAdd to research |
| IBM Turbonomic | 4.4 | 4.7% | 98% | 205 interviewsAdd to research |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 3 |
| Large Enterprise | 5 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 40 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 16 |
| Large Enterprise | 28 |
Cloudify's robust orchestration abilities are complemented by its ability to support major cloud providers and its ease of use in following templates. The extensibility through custom logic and plugins facilitates orchestrated startups, multi-cloud deployments, service chaining, and operational actions. Despite its strengths, users face challenges such as complex debugging, a steep learning curve when compared to Docker, and limited multitenancy features. There's a need for improvements in installation, event monitoring, error handling, simplified upgrades, and better plugin robustness. Connectivity issues, mobile app integration, and broader operating system support remain areas for development.
What are Cloudify's most important features?In industries like telecom, edge computing, and networking, Cloudify is essential for orchestrating complex deployments and infrastructure management. Organizations leverage its capabilities for CI/CD processes, system testing, and NVF-related tasks. It enables the deployment of REST applications, virtual machines, and private clouds using technologies like Tomcat, SaltStack, Kubernetes, and OpenStack, while communicating effectively with tools such as ServiceNow, PowerShell, Python, and PSQL.
Proximus
Partner Communications (Israel)
VMware
NTT Data
Metaswitch
Spirent Communications
Lumina Networks
Atos
Fortinet
| Author info | Rating | Review Summary |
|---|---|---|
| Cloud Architect at Cox communications | 4.0 | I found Cloudify excellent for advanced service orchestration and automation, but its lack of a GUI for basic platform management and reliance on extensive coding wasn't suitable for my needs, so I switched. It's a niche tool, not a full cloud management solution. |
| Senior Backend Engineer at HelloFresh | 4.5 | I rate Cloudify highly for its extendibility, crucial for complex multi-cloud and telecom use cases like CI/CD and infrastructure deployment. While stable and scalable with responsive support, I'd like a simpler upgrade process. |
| DevOps Consultant at Coforge Growth Agency | 5.0 | As a user, I find Cloudify a stable, user-friendly DevOps tool for VM management, highly integrated with our infrastructure. It's scalable, but I wish error handling and GUI privileges were better. I rate it 10/10. |
| DevOps at Bank of CD | 3.5 | I use this solution for hybrid VM deployment. While stable, its blueprint errors and poor scalability are a headache. Its legacy nature and lack of modern integrations are pushing my team towards more efficient alternatives like Azure. |
| IT Infrastructure Architect at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees | 3.5 | I use this for top-level application orchestration. Its TOSCA model is great for application modeling and infrastructure-as-code. I appreciate its operational actions, but wish installation and event monitoring were better. |
| Software Consultant at a financial services firm with 11-50 employees | 4.0 | I found Cloudify valuable for orchestrating private clouds, catching scaling issues early. Its extensible framework, custom Python plugins, and ability to use only needed functions are great, though the UI certainly needs intensive work. |
| Software Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees | 4.5 | I used Cloudify 2.x for 1-3 years, deploying a REST application with its valuable auto-scaling and load balancing in production. However, I found its configuration and learning curve lengthy compared to Docker. |
| Researcher, Programmer, Project leader at a tech vendor with 51-200 employees | 4.0 | I value its good TOSCA blueprint support, which simplified our deployments and offered extensibility. Initial setup was straightforward, and customer service is responsive. My main request is for Ubuntu 16.04+ support. |
| devOps engineer at a financial services firm | 3.5 | I found this solution easy to use for continuous cloud server deployment. It has been stable for three months, but I believe it needs more debug functionality and options to pause during server builds. |
| IT Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees | 3.5 | I have used this solution for six months. It was straightforward to set up, and I experienced no deployment, stability, or scalability issues. It reduced manual release tasks, and I rate the customer and technical support as good. |
We were examining Cloudify. We got Cloudify into our organization, and we did some proof of concept and prototyping initially. We liked it. It was a good solution for what it's meant to do, but it wasn't the right solution for what we needed. So, we decommissioned Cloudify and switched to Morpheus instead.
Its version was a fairly recent one.
We had a manager who thought that Cloudify could be used as a replacement for Horizon in OpenStack, but we found that Cloudify lacked the user interface or GUI for doing multitenancy and basic platform management tasks.
Cloudify was really good at launching, for example, firewalls and configuring them and doing service chaining and rather advanced things like that, but it didn't meet the requirements for a basic platform management solution. It is something that seems to work better as a bolt-on or an augmented solution. It is a bit mis-marketed as a Cloud Management solution. It is not that. It is more of a service orchestration and automation tool. It is very good at doing that, but it fails to meet basic platform management requirements.
Once you have it running, you can't really do anything with it without writing code and scripts. It requires a full-time DevOps person to use it. We deployed a Palo Alto firewall with it. That's basically what the project was for us, and it worked flawlessly once we got it finished, but it took another 12 weeks to get all of the automation and everything else coded, tested, and working. There is certainly a place for this technology, but when we got rid of OpenStack and moved to VMware, we either had to go with the vRealize Automation Suite to do this kind of automation, or we had to find an alternative solution to manage the private cloud. So, we put Cloudify in, but we really couldn't find it useful for basic platform administration tasks.
Cloudify works in cases where you have very advanced service chaining requirements. It really works well there, and it fits the best. They have a standardized markup that's based on TOSCA, which is a standard. I like the fact that they're standards-based. Their solution works extremely well if you have the talent and the manpower to write TOSCA descriptors to deploy and interchange services or to automate the configuration and turn up of services.
It lacked the user interface for multitenancy and basic platform management tasks. It is a leader in the niche area that they like to perform in, but it only does about 30% of top-tier advanced functions of platform management. It doesn't meet about 70% of what you need to manage a private cloud platform.
It is stable. Cloudify is certainly a quality product.
Its scalability is fine. It scales well. We had a team of about six people using it.
Their support is very helpful and very responsive. It is an advanced product, and the people they keep on staff to support it are extremely advanced engineers.
In terms of setting it up and complexity, I would probably rate it a seven out of ten. I spent about a week doing a basic installation of it.
I wasn't involved in the pricing of it because we were just doing prototype work with it, but I was told by the upper management team that it was quite expensive. That was another reason we switched to Morpheus.
I'd rate it an eight out of ten. It is very good at what it does.
From a developer's perspective, we use Cloudify to deploy infrastructures and as part of CI/CD. We also use it as part of the system and integration testing, to run and provision infrastructures, and test clusters. Our customers use Cloudify for NVF related needs, telecom, and edge computing use cases. In addition it's used for networking -- VMware, OpenStack and the like.
There are numerous valuable features in this solution including that Cloudify supports all the major cloud providers. One of the cool features is its extendibility which means you can build your own custom logic by building a Cloudify plugin and deploying that plugin to Cloudify manager. I also like the usage of the Cloudify cluster setup where you can use it for high availability and manage complex use cases. In addition to that, Cloudify support deployment update and day-2 operation where it would be easy to manage and modify existing nodes.
I'd like to see a more simplified upgrade process so it can be completed in one step rather than multiple steps (snapshot backup + snapshot restore). I think they may be working on it and I hope it happens soon.
I've used this solution for over three years.
I think the solution is quite stable and trusted by customers.
The solution is scalable. One of the cool features is that you can have roles for adding users, permissions for who can see the deployment, who can deploy it, and full control over permissions. It also has the capability to integrate Cloudify with a lot of third parties like LDAP, OKTA.
The support team is very responsive .
Positive
There are several options for downloading Cloudify and it's not too complicated. For the all-in-one, it takes about few minutes. The cluster will take longer. Cloudify can be installed on VM, Docker & K8S
Cloudify offers a premium version and a community version. The community version has the basics. The premium version requires a license but I'm unaware of the cost.
This is a somewhat complex solution for very complex use cases where there are multiple cloud vendors, multiple infrastructures, and multiple configurations. It solves a lot of issues for complex operations. It's good for the telecom industry. If you have multiple locations with a lot of tools that you want to integrate, and complex teams using different solutions, and you want to unify all these under one umbrella, I think Cloudify is a good product. If you're looking to provision infrastructure on a specific cloud and manage RDS, for example, I think the use case would be less suitable because you'd need to purchase a license for something you're not going to use.
I rate this solution nine out of 10 primarily because of its extendibility which is great.
Cloudify is a DevOps tool that we use for spinning up the VM. In order to do that it needs to communicate with the IP address, with the storage, the network, and with ServiceNow. It communicates with multiple tools and is a single-point tool that enables script development on PowerShell, Python, and PSQL. I'm an engineer and user of this solution and we are customers of Cloudify.
The best feature of Cloudify is that it enables a single platform to communicate with the DB, with applications, and with the entire infrastructure. The product is very stable and has a lot of troubleshooting and analytical features. It's easy to understand and user-friendly. If you want to uninstall something, it's very easy to have the logic created in Cloudify. Other solutions don't have this. For example, if you wanted to decommission after three or four years, rather than going for a full decommission, it's possible to unallocate a particular space. If you want to allocate storage for a new build, it's very easy to deploy, uninstall and release some storage from the TOSCA.
The solution could be improved with respect to error handling. If the deployment fails, we get an error message. If we want to troubleshoot further and deep dive, we don't have access to admin privileges to extract those errors. The GUI could be improved with respect to user privileges and connectivity could also be improved. Finally, in the version I'm using, the solution lacks integration with mobile apps.
I've been using this solution for three years.
The solution is quite stable and we have only experienced one downtime in all the years I've been using it.
The solution is scalable. We have over 500 users who are all DevOps engineers.
Customer service has a central team where we can report issues. They are very approachable. We are very, very customer-oriented and their service is highly appreciated.
The README notes are very helpful in terms of going through each functionality. We went through these before the initial setup. The deployment took some time because we have a multi-tenant setup, which involved the spinning up of almost four VMs. If TOSCA can communicate with the network for a single solution, it works faster. But if you need TOSCA to do some complex solutioning, it can take some time.
This is a user-friendly tool that I would highly recommend to a new startup company or a well-established enterprise company. I've worked on other solutions, none of which have had the highly integrated aspects of Cloudify so I rate this solution 10 out of 10.
I use a hybrid model of the solution as a blueprint to create and deploy virtual machines to the open stack.
The solution includes the option to run background scripts and processes from a connected API.
The YAML format is also easy to use with some practice.
Documentation is sufficient to learn from examples and modify to any company's needs.
The solution is a bit of a headache because mistakes happen in the blueprint every time we deploy and they require modifications. Containerizing deployments would make the process simpler.
There should be a way to create plugins and connect to tools like HashiCorp Vault to read secrets instead of having secrets located inside the blueprint or YAML file. Currently, we have to run a script in another cloud platform to read and copy secrets. The solution might gain users if it connected with other cloud platforms.
Our developers have to create templates for Amazon Azure because they do not exist on the solution's website.
I have been using the solution for four years.
The solution is stable.
The solution is difficult to scale because deployments are not containerized.
The initial setup was not complicated but was not user-friendly because it takes time to learn. If mistakes are made or something is missing, it might take multiple tries to rectify problems because the solution does not identify errors.
We implement and manage the solution in-house.
Our client is a legacy bank with more than 500 users and many servers running the solution. We deployed the first API on Azure more than a year ago and hope to deploy others over time.
We are moving to Azure because it includes many tools that make it more scalable and efficient such as being able to change templates and VMs, working with Terraform and Kubernetes, and using Docker containers. We don't have to type a million things to deploy a VM and Azure includes automatic connection to a vault containing the secrets. We use an open stack and it is unknown if this will be transferred to Azure.
The solution is a legacy product and it takes time to understand it because there are a lot of dependencies. Not every cloud company uses the product so it is not professionally useful on a CV or in the cloud industry.
I spent over a year understanding the inner workings because it is like coding. There are dependencies like plugins that have to be deployed properly or ongoing issues will occur. If there are processes I don't know or an update that is needed, it is up to me to find the appropriate documentation and modify my blueprint. For example, I look at what other developers write for updating plugins and then I copy and paste it to my blueprint.
Even with the learning curve, the solution is an interesting concept and reminds me of Vagrant Terraform with its own difficulties and easiness. Virtual machines can be deployed with the YAML files so working knowledge of YAML is helpful. It allows provisioning of AWS clusters which is important for Kubernetes.
I rate the solution a seven out of ten.
Our use case is top-level orchestration: Orchestration of applications made up of different technologies, by subcontracting work to underlying orchestrators which are more technology-specific, like IaaS, DBaaS, Kubernetes or home-grown solutions.
The TOSCA model. It allows modeling the application rather than the automation. It is a machine-readable representation of the application and its infrastructure, which can be used for other things too, not just for the orchestration (e.g. enterprise architecture big picture, who connects to whom).
Cloudify also provides the infrastructure-as-code, as well as operational action capabilities (orchestrated startups or upgrades, and more).
Install of the product itself could be improved and I would like to see better event monitoring.
Working with a major bank to set up a private cloud and used Cloudify implementation as an orchestrator, based on TOSCA blueprints.
Environment was VMWare and OpenStack based instances that was configured using SaltStack.
Product has given us the ability to catch scaling issues early on that many companies hit on with private clouds.
We’ve found application modeling being abstract blueprints fits the need for developers to implement their much needed bi-product from a simple template.
Cloudify provides a good framework that you can build on to provide custom solutions for an organization.
Certainly the UI could use some intensive work, but nevertheless, overall, it’s a complete product with its 3.4 version and much better features are available with 4.0.
We configured our application using Cloudify in our production environment. We deployed the REST application with Tomcat and configured it with Cloudify auto-scaling and load balancing configuration.
I think about the containers (Docker). We can quickly create a local cloud with Kubernetes, a global deployable format (container), good resource utilization, and open source.
I used the 2.x version and did not use the 3.x version.
It has enabled us to create the DICE Deployment Service. It also simplified deployment of any other services (monitoring, continuous integration, etc.).
It would be great if it would start supporting Ubuntu 16.04 or newer.
I have used it since spring 2015.
There were some issues with deploying the solution on OpenStack Mitaka. However, we were able to resolve them.
We have not encountered any stability issues. Since version 3.4.0, the solution is stable.
No scalability issues so far.
Very responsive and helpful support through mailing lists and groups.
Initial setup was fairly straightforward though following the documentation.
We have an in-house team.
We also evaluated Brooklyn and Alien4Cloud. None of them offered stable TOSCA blueprint support.
It is easy to follow the template.
It's easy to create a cloud server, such as Linux with JBoss or WebSphere, which is good for continuous deployment.
More of the debug functionality is needed; hopefully, we can pause during the server building process.
I have used this solution for three months.
There were no stability issues.
We were not using any other solution before.
Another team was responsible for the setup in the low-level environment.
You should be familiar with more testing procedures.
No need to change the existing application code base.
Reduced the manual tasks during application release activities.
We have been using this solution for six months.
I did not encounter any issues with deployment.
I did not encounter any issues with stability.
I did encounter any issues with scalability.
I would rate customer support as good.
Technical Support:I would rate technical support as good.
We did not evaluate any other options.
The setup was straightforward.
In-house teams implemented it.
Pricing and licensing are decent.
We did not evaluate other options.
