Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Amazon DocumentDB vs MongoDB Atlas comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 3, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Amazon DocumentDB
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
MongoDB Atlas
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
7th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
Database as a Service (DBaaS) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Amazon DocumentDB is 10.0%, down from 13.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of MongoDB Atlas is 6.1%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Javed Zahoor - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers the ability to replicate data across different instances
Its speed has had the most significant impact on our projects. For starters, we used it for its flexibility. With DocumentDB, you're not tied to a rigid structure like you are with Aurora or other relational databases. This makes it great for startups. When we work with established systems where the structure is well-defined, the speed of DocumentDB becomes the most important factor. Compared to a relational database, scaling DocumentDB is easier because of its ability to replicate data across different instances. If you use a network-based storage service with your cluster, the primary instance doesn't even need a full local copy of the data, since it's accessible on the shared storage. That definitely contributes to scalability. AWS-managed services already handle a lot of the scaling complexity. We don't have to do anything.
Laksiri Bala - PeerSpot reviewer
Room for improvement in data handling leads to enhanced cost-effective data management performance
It would be beneficial if MongoDB Atlas could better support OLTP aspects and data frames, as well as enhance its capabilities for data pipelines and visualization dashboards. Furthermore, supporting the medallion architecture could be a valuable addition, and incorporating improved spatial and vector handling for geographical data could make it more competitive. Enhancing vector processing for AI capabilities would also be critical.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Migrations are easy using this product."
"Its speed has had the most significant impact on our projects. For starters, we used it for its flexibility. With DocumentDB, you're not tied to a rigid structure like you are with Aurora or other relational databases. This makes it great for startups."
"Amazon DocumentDB is a simple solution."
"Scalability is its most valuable feature, as it is pretty simple."
"The most beneficial MongoDB features for our workload are the ability to scale up and down using automatic sharding and clustering."
"It's flexible. We don't need to have a solid upstream availability failover, and everything is seamless in Atlas."
"The product allows us to easily set up and store large amounts of unstructured data."
"This solution is very helpful due to its ease of use."
"The solution is easy to use, the console is user-friendly, and overall a well-designed solution. It takes a complex system and makes it easy to understand. Additionally, the solution is always advancing and they provide a roadmap into what is coming in the future."
"MongoDB Atlas is a database that is quite fast, stable, and reliable."
"What I found most valuable in MongoDB Atlas is its Elasticsearch feature. It also has high availability, so it's stable."
 

Cons

"One possible improvement could be a hybrid database solution, where parts of the application leverage a relational database alongside DocumentDB. If a system were heavily relational in nature, a database like PostgreSQL might be a good fit."
"The technical support could be improved."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the beginning."
"The speed when combining two documents is concerning."
"In the past, MongoDB offered more features for free, but now it's quite limited. The free version is limited, and you need to pay extra to fully utilize it. The pricing could be improved."
"I would like the solution to offer more integration capabilities since it is an area where the solution lacks."
"From an improvement standpoint, MongoDB can improve security."
"Customer support needs improvement knowledge-wise."
"The product does not have ORM."
"I would like a more comprehensive dashboard."
"The replica side, like the venue, can be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The solution is fairly priced. I rate the pricing a seven out of ten."
"We're currently using the Atlas for the night and don't require a license. However, it can be a problem if you want to use their enterprise environment. Then you need to purchase the license."
"The solution is fairly priced."
"I have seen the cost, and it was pretty cheap."
"For me, MongoDB is expensive, but I think it is not so expensive for customers."
"MongoDB Atlas is more cost-effective than Amazon DocumentDB. It also has a pay-as-you-go pricing model. Apart from the standard licensing cost, you must also pay to get MongoDB Atlas technical support, which is expensive."
"The pricing is good. We originally chose it over DynamoDB because of the pricing."
"The pricing is acceptable for enterprise tier."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
21%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Government
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What advice do you have for others considering Amazon DocumentDB?
Amazon DocumentDB offers us many useful features. It is definitely a solution that an organization in need of comprehensive and effective document management should invest its money into. We are im...
What do you like most about Amazon DocumentDB?
Its speed has had the most significant impact on our projects. For starters, we used it for its flexibility. With DocumentDB, you're not tied to a rigid structure like you are with Aurora or other ...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon DocumentDB?
The specific DocumentDB implementation we use is on the expensive side. We tend to use it strategically in complex systems, primarily for lookup capabilities. For simpler use cases, we often choose...
What do you like most about MongoDB Atlas?
There are many valuable features, but scalability stands out. It can scale across zones. You can define multiple nodes. They have also partnered with AWS, offering great service with multiple featu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for MongoDB Atlas?
The price of MongoDB Atlas is reasonable, which is why many organizations, including mine, are opting for it.
What needs improvement with MongoDB Atlas?
It would be beneficial if MongoDB Atlas could better support OLTP aspects and data frames, as well as enhance its capabilities for data pipelines and visualization dashboards. Furthermore, supporti...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Atlas
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Finra, The Washington Post, Freshop
Wells Fargo, Forbes, Ulta Beauty, Bosch, Sanoma, Current (a Digital Bank), ASAP Log, SBB, Zebra Technologies, Radial, Kovai, Eni, Accuhit, Cognigy, and Payload.
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon DocumentDB vs. MongoDB Atlas and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
851,604 professionals have used our research since 2012.