AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket Server comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Atlassian are both solutions in the Version Control category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Atlassian is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 5.0% mindshare in VC, compared to Atlassian’s 13.2% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 86% of Atlassian users who would recommend it.

AWS CodeCommit

Read 13 AWS CodeCommit reviews

772 Views
772 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

Bitbucket Server

Read 27 Bitbucket Server reviews

2,007 Views
2,007 Comparison Views

86% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Bitbucket Server

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 28, 2025

Bitbucket Server and AWS CodeCommit are competing products in the version control category. AWS CodeCommit appears to have the upper hand due to its robust feature set and seamless integration with AWS environments, which many users find valuable.

Features: Bitbucket Server's strengths include integration within Atlassian's suite, collaboration tools, and a customizable workflow that fits agile team needs. AWS CodeCommit offers highly scalable integration with AWS services, effective cloud integration, and native support for continuous delivery.

Room for Improvement: Bitbucket Server could enhance its cloud-native capabilities, reduce maintenance demand, and improve user management features. AWS CodeCommit might benefit from better user interface customization, expanded third-party integrations outside of AWS, and improved access management for non-technical users.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Bitbucket Server's on-premises deployment is customizable, aligning well with enterprise requirements, but it demands more resources for maintenance. AWS CodeCommit boasts a fully managed, easy-to-deploy cloud setup, minimizing infrastructure management concerns. AWS customer service is enhanced by comprehensive AWS support plans, unlike Bitbucket, which may place higher demands on resources for maintenance.

Pricing and ROI: Bitbucket Server requires upfront investment with cost-effective advantages over time due to ecosystem efficiencies. AWS CodeCommit's pay-as-you-go model presents cost flexibility and low entry barriers. AWS's ROI is enhanced by scalability and AWS integration, whereas Bitbucket's ROI reflects lower costs in self-hosted setups with greater long-term savings potential.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 881,707 peers since 2012

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

AWS CodeCommit

Ranking in Version Control

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Bitbucket Server

Ranking in Version Control

2nd

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

5.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 5.0%, down from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bitbucket Server is 13.2%, down from 28.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Bitbucket Server	13.2%
AWS CodeCommit	5.0%
Other	81.8%

Version Control

Featured Reviews

Uma Tulasi

DevOps Engineer at Huntington Bank

Seamless integration enhances team collaboration and process efficiency

The Git interfaces in AWS CodeCommit definitely need work. When we migrated our payment processing system at Huntington, we found the web UI to be basic compared to GitHub and GitLab. Simple things such as viewing directory structures or browsing through commit history and pull request flow could use serious upgrades. We had to create workarounds for features that come standard elsewhere, such as automatically assigning reviewers based on code ownership and setting up required review templates. The search functionality is another pain point, as trying to find specific code across repositories is limited. At Walgreens, we had a large mono repo for our pharmacy services code, and developers constantly complained about how difficult it was to search through it effectively in AWS CodeCommit. I also wish it had better CI/CD visualization built in.

Read full review

Syed Fahad Anwar

Principal System Developer at DiwanDubai

Integrated code tracking has streamlined our development workflows and supports project visibility

The biggest benefit I see from Bitbucket Server is that it is providing all the features which Git is providing. Bitbucket Server is using Git as a source code main tool, and it has all the features that any source code repository can provide. A plus point is that we can install it on-premises and manage it easily. Using Bitbucket Server helps me easily track my code changes and where they belong, which saves a lot of time and effort. Without Bitbucket Server, it is very difficult to track the code and changes. The integration with Jira helps me personally with project tracking because Bitbucket Server is a source code repository. We have our SDLC lifecycle in Jira. Every change or every feature request is created as a ticket in Jira, and this ticket is linked with Bitbucket Server repository. Any changes to the code linked to that feature will go to the repository, and we can track that this is the code changed by this feature.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The customer service is pretty good."

"What I find best about AWS CodeCommit is its seamless integration with the AWS ecosystem."

"It is a really good product where you can easily create your repository and integrate it with other tools such as IAM to handle the user and management aspects of the repository."

"The solution is quite scalable."

"AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap."

"The customer service is pretty good."

"AWS CodeCommit has the usual version control features, and it integrates with AWS CodeGuru for code reviews."

"The solution scalable."

More AWS CodeCommit pros

"Its integration with Jenkins pipelines for automating builds and performing various checks enhances its utility."

"In terms of benefits, I feel that many companies are moving to Bitbucket Server since it can be deployed on an on-premises model at a time when everything is being moved to the cloud."

"The product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines."

"Bitbucket Server supports code collaboration by providing commands developers can use to check in code. Through comments, developers can specify the purpose of the code check-in. Additionally, Bitbucket allows tagging of code for releases."

"The initial setup is straightforward. It takes half an hour to deploy."

"Its standout features are the seamless integration with various intelligent tools and its user-friendly nature."

"Bitbucket Server is easy to use. You can use other applications to access it, or you can use it to access the internet. You can use solutions, such as Sourcetree, which is free, and put it on your development system and use it to do the check-in, checkouts, and those type of operations. It is nice, but some other developers may agree."

"The product is easy to maintain."

More Bitbucket Server pros

Cons

"There is room for improvement in how AWS CodeCommit handles mass changes, like Fortran, which is designed to make these alterations in a friendly manner across AWS requirements."

"Migration in and out of CodeCommit should be improved."

"The number of users for AWS CodeCommit is generally less compared to other version control systems."

"When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide."

"Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket."

"Not really that much stands out. I am using CodeCommit since my customer asked me to use it. It is just an appliance, and GitHub and GitLab can do a better job."

"Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price."

"There are some options in Bitbucket that are not available in AWS CodeCommit. For example, code reviewer. We can't add a code reviewer in AWS CodeCommit, and we can't fork the repository online. These are the two things that Bitbucket has, but the solution doesn't have. Also, Jira has a debugging option that AWS CodeCommit doesn't have. Another thing is that Bitbucket charges three dollars per month per user. Compared with AWS CodeCommit, that only charges one dollar per month. So, AWS CodeCommit is cheaper than Bitbucket. But it does not have enough features that Bitbucket has. Additionally, it will be good if you upload one video or documentation on how to use AWS CodeCommit for beginners. That will be more helpful. There you can add more details about pricing. There are not many details about pricing. Bitbucket has a table where they have mentioned everything in detail, like, what features for how much price, how much longer you can use and how many users can use."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

"The improvements in the product could be made to expand third-party integrations and enhance support for open-source projects."

"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."

"The response time of the product's support team may not be good enough to meet the expectations of users, making it an area where improvements are required."

"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."

"Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive."

"The product requires patching and version improvements. Some functions do not work properly when we move from one version to another. We need a technical improvement. Also, communicating with other Atlassian products becomes cumbersome when we move from one version to another. I want Bitbucket Server to include a dashboard similar to Jira's. Atlassian must also develop a tool to scan our complete base for vulnerabilities."

"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."

"The UI could be enhanced."

More Bitbucket Server cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS CodeCommit is competitively priced against all the other competitors."

"The solution is expensive."

"As for pricing, you can add the table in detail. You can visit Bitbucket or refer to any other tools. There, you can see what is the difference between your pricing and other prices. You have only mentioned it in a single line. Other tools have been mentioned in a table format, like, how many users, premium, normal accounts, and other things."

"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing. The licensing is based on the number of users, but I'm not entirely certain about the details."

"There is a cost to use this solution but it is based on how many users are using it. If you have 50 users or 1,000 users the price will be very different."

"The solution comes as a part of the suite."

"As for licensing, Bitbucket is one of the more affordable options."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly. Prices can become expensive if you have a lot of users."

"One needs to pay towards the licensing charges associated with the product."

"Bitbucket Server is quite expensive compared to other products."

"The platform offers a free version for public repositories, which benefits open-source projects."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

11%

University

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	10
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is actually one of the cost-effective AWS services. It follows a straightforward pricing model where you pay for users and storage. With around 40 to 50 developers, it ranges from $1...

See all answers

What needs improvement with AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is a good product to use when you also have to use CodePipeline because it is all integrated in the same system, which is beneficial. However, the integration with other code pipelin...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is a version control system integrated directly in the cloud environment, similar to GitHub, GitLab, and other platforms. It offers every single benefit of using any other version co...

See all answers

What do you like most about Bitbucket Server?

The product is easy to maintain.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Bitbucket Server?

There are certain features in Bitbucket Server that could be better or enhanced, which would make our life easier. One limitation is that we can control granular permissions, but there are some lim...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Bitbucket Server?

My major use case for Bitbucket Server is that it is a source code repository. We are using it to store our application source code, and we are tracking the check-in, check-out, and all the activit...

See all answers

Comparisons

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 40% of the time

GitHub vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 29% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 14% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Bitbucket vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 58% of the time

GitHub vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 10% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 9% of the time

Liquibase vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 6% of the time

Git vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 4% of the time

More Bitbucket Server Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit

January 2026

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

Buyer's Guide

Bitbucket Server

January 2026

Download Bitbucket Server product report

Also Known As

CodeCommit

Stash

Overview

AWS CodeCommit is a fully-managed source control service that hosts secure Git-based repositories. It makes it easy for teams to collaborate on code in a secure and highly scalable ecosystem. CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Bitbucket Server offers seamless integrations with tools like Jira and Jenkins, a user-friendly interface, and robust code collaboration features. It's known for excellent development support, scalability, and high availability, making it a preferred choice for many technical teams.

Bitbucket Server stands out due to its flexibility in workflows and ability to manage branching and code integration. It supports pull requests, private repositories, and is easy to manage on servers. Integration with CI/CD pipelines and traceability features enhances its functionality. Though there are areas requiring improvement such as remote site capabilities, granular access control, and support for large files, it remains a vital tool for code management, version control, and repository management in the CI/CD ecosystem, often utilized alongside Jenkins, Bamboo, and Jira. It supports software development processes such as task tracking and issue logging.

What are the key features of Bitbucket Server?

Seamless Integration: Integrates with Jira and Jenkins for enhanced workflow.
User-Friendly Interface: Designed for simplicity and ease of use.
Robust Code Collaboration: Supports branching and pull requests.
Scalability and High Availability: Reliable across all project sizes.
CI/CD Pipeline Integration: Streamlines deployment processes with CI/CD tools.

What benefits should users look for in the reviews?

Development Support: Provides extensive resources for aiding development.
Flexibility in Workflows: Adaptable to different project needs.
Permission Management: Effective control over user access.
Code Quality Maintenance: Ensures high standards in code management.
Traceability: Offers excellent tracking features for seamless integration.

In industries with strong development focus, Bitbucket Server plays a critical role in managing code versions and repositories. It supports agile planning and DevOps practices, enabling organizations to streamline code integration and task management efficiently. Companies benefit from its robust features, especially in complex software development environments.

Atlassian

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob

Netflix, Nasa, Rakuten, Best Buy, Philips, Nordstrom, Intuit, Zillow, Citi.

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

February 2026

Free Report: AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server report.

See our list of best Version Control vendors.

We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.