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

Amazon Neptune vs Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 25, 2026

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 Neptune
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
4.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
1st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
109
Ranking in other categories
Database as a Service (DBaaS) (4th), NoSQL Databases (2nd), Vector Databases (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Amazon Neptune is 7.0%, down from 14.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is 16.5%, down from 16.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Managed NoSQL Databases Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB16.5%
Amazon Neptune7.0%
Other76.5%
Managed NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

Reviewer3028812 - PeerSpot reviewer
Back End Developer at Zeta
Multiple graph models and languages support lead to efficient use, yet community growth brings challenges
The onboarding part and documentation where we could ideally use Amazon Neptune is excellent. Amazon Neptune as a product by AWS is exceptional because it supports multiple graph models such as RDF and property graph. It also has support for multiple querying languages such as Gremlin, SparkQL, and OpenCypher. It is very comprehensive in supporting every requirement we had at Zetta. Amazon Neptune's best features include its multiple servers, each supporting different languages such as OpenCypher, SparkQL, and RDF. For the same RDF graph or property graph, we could use multiple languages to query on different servers. This is exceptional because we have one graph DB with two endpoints exposed where we could interact with different languages on the same graph. Additionally, Amazon has a Sagemaker Jupyter Notebook which interacts with the Amazon Neptune database itself, providing a clean UI for representing nodes since the Jupyter Notebook has predefined graph representation capabilities through queries.
reviewer2724105 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Director of Product Management at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees
Provides super sharp latency, excellent availability, and the ability to effectively manage costs across different tenants
For integrating Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB with other Azure products or other products, there are a couple of challenges with the current system. Right now, the vectors are stored as floating-point numbers within the NoSQL document, which makes them inefficiently large. This leads to increased storage space requirements, and searching through a vast number of documents in the vector database becomes quite costly in terms of RUs. While the integration works well, the expense associated with it is relatively high. I would really like to see a reduction in costs for their vector search, as it is currently on the expensive side. The areas for improvement in Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB are vector pricing and vector indexing patterns, which are unintuitive and not well described. I would also like to see the parameters of Fleet Spaces made more powerful, as currently, it's somewhat lightweight. I believe they've made those changes intentionally to better understand the cost model. However, we would like to take a more aggressive approach in using it. One of the most frustrating aspects of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB right now is that you can only store one vector per document. Additionally, you must specify the configuration of that vector when you create an instance of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB. Once the database is set up, you can't change the vector configuration, which is incredibly limiting for experimentation. You want the ability to try different settings and see how they perform, as there are numerous use cases for storing more than one vector in a document. While interoperability within the vector database is acceptable—for example, I can search for vectors—I still desire a richer set of configuration options.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is actually simple."
"Amazon Neptune as a product by AWS is exceptional because it supports multiple graph models such as RDF and property graph, and it also has support for multiple querying languages such as Gremlin, SparkQL, and OpenCypher, making it very comprehensive in supporting every requirement we had at Zetta."
"Relational databases are never good at identifying patterns in graphs or other similar relationships, whereas Amazon Neptune is."
"Amazon Neptune as a product by AWS is exceptional because it supports multiple graph models such as RDF and property graph, and it also has support for multiple querying languages such as Gremlin, SparkQL, and OpenCypher, making it very comprehensive in supporting every requirement we had at Zetta."
"The benefits of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB were immediate for us."
"Cosmos is preferred because of its speed, robustness, and utilization."
"The customer gave us the feedback that they are able to easily find the data they are looking for. It is very quick."
"The best features of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB include the speed to query data; as long as you index properly, retrieving data is fast and lightweight."
"Reading and inserting data into Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a very smooth process."
"I truly recommend Cosmos DB because it is a serverless product."
"The connectors, such as the MongoDB connector and the integration with SQL, are incredibly valuable."
"The speed is impressive, and integrating our power-up database with Kafka was an improvement."
 

Cons

"In my scenario, the integration wasn't easy because ................in Java."
"Amazon Neptune could improve by spreading more awareness for others to have an understanding of the solution because the technology is fairly new. The developer community and larger community do not understand it yet."
"We had a strict time constraint, and it took many sleepless nights to find information in the documentation."
"We had a strict time constraint, and it took many sleepless nights to find information in the documentation."
"One area for improvement is the ease of writing SQL queries and stored procedures in Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB."
"In Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB, I would suggest improvements in security."
"The RUs still appear to be a black box for everyone. Even though they explain read and write RUs, it remains unclear for many users."
"The current data analytics of Cosmos DB is inefficient for large-scale queries due to its transactional design."
"The size of the continuation token in Azure Cosmos DB should be static rather than increasing with more data, as it can lead to application crashes."
"Continuing to educate customers on how they can take better advantage of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB without having to completely rewrite their entire application paradigm would be beneficial. They can help them understand that there are multiple options to interact with it. They do not necessarily have to start from scratch. They can refactor their existing application to be able to use it better."
"Overall, it works very well and fits the purpose regardless of the target application. However, by default, there is a threshold to accommodate bulk or large requests."
"Customer service and technical support from Microsoft have been all right. On a scale of 1 to 10, I would give them probably a six, maybe a hard seven at most."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Microsoft Azure and Amazon AWS are on par for pricing and Google has been raising its prices."
"Everything could always be cheaper. I like that Cosmos DB allows us to auto-scale instead of pre-provisioning a certain capacity. It automatically scales to the demand, so we only pay for what we consume."
"Pricing is one of the solution's main features because it is based on usage, scales automatically, and is not too costly."
"The pricing for Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is good. Initially, it seemed like an expensive way to manage a NoSQL data store, but so many improvements that have been made to the platform have made it cost-effective."
"It seems to have helped significantly. We were using a different database system previously, and one of the reasons for acquiring Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB was cost."
"Cosmos should be cheaper. We actually intend to stop using it in the near future because the price is too high."
"Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's licensing costs are monthly."
"Most customers like the flexibility of the pricing model, and it has not been an issue. They can start small, and the cost grows with adoption, allowing efficient management of the budget. Its pricing model has not been a concern at all for any of our customers. They understand it. It is simple enough to understand. Oftentimes, it is hard to forecast the RUs, but, in general, it has been fine."
"With heavy use, like a large-scale IoT implementation, you could easily hit a quarter of a million dollars a month in Azure charges if Cosmos DB is a big part of it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Computer Software Company
13%
University
13%
Insurance Company
7%
Legal Firm
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise58
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Amazon Neptune?
The cost aspects were managed by our SRE team who provisioned the instances. The pricing structure is similar to how EC2 instance pricing varies. I was informed that it was somewhat expensive, thou...
What needs improvement with Amazon Neptune?
The main issue was the limited community of Amazon Neptune users, which meant everything needed to be explored independently. Although this was adventurous, it required more time investment in the ...
What is your primary use case for Amazon Neptune?
We managed traffic at Zetta, and traffic would be moving between multiple services in our microservice architecture. Because of this setup, we were using Amazon Neptune to understand how many reque...
What do you like most about Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB?
The initial setup is simple and straightforward. You can set up a Cosmos DB in a day, even configuring things like availability zones around the world.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB?
Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's pricing model has aligned with my budget expectations because I can tune the RU as I need to, which helps a lot. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's dynamic auto-scale or server...
What needs improvement with Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB?
I have not utilized Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB multi-model support for handling diverse data types. I'm not in the position to decide if clients will use Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB or any other datab...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Microsoft Azure DocumentDB, MS Azure Cosmos DB
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Intuit, Pearson, Samsung, Ignition One, Lifeomic, Blackfynn, Paysense
TomTom, KPMG Australia, Bosch, ASOS, Mercedes Benz, NBA, Zero Friction, Nederlandse Spoorwegen, Kinectify
Find out what your peers are saying about Amazon Neptune vs. Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.