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

Buildkite vs JFrog Pipeline comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Buildkite
Ranking in Build Automation
8th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
14
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
JFrog Pipeline
Ranking in Build Automation
23rd
Average Rating
8.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of Buildkite is 1.4%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JFrog Pipeline is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Build Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Prabin Silwal - PeerSpot reviewer
Has an easy setup phase while also offering good documentation
The problem we are facing sometimes is that we have lots of unit testers, and we have to wait about ten minutes to complete all of those because we want to run or find a way. It's not directly due to the limitation of the tool as well, but when we are running the spec, we want to run those parallelly and decrease the downtime so that our deployment can be faster. I think that one is not possible only due to the it also depends upon the unit test framework as well we are using. When we tried with the multiple test cases in a parallel manner, there were some dependencies, and one over another kept failing. We make those sequential calls. The aforementioned area consists of the issues my company faced while using Buildkite.
Steve Buttler - PeerSpot reviewer
Testing against multiple run times, versions, and environments is a plus point
We are using Shippable to automate our CI/CD, so we (and our developers) can focus on our core business.  Shippable has tremendously increased our product and features delivery by at least three times. The platform has some amazing features and the integration option makes it very simple to plug…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Buildkite's UI is particularly intuitive, making it simple to add steps to your pipeline. It also provides detailed logging."
"The tool's flexibility with pipelines gave us a lot of advantages, especially when managing a huge amount of microservices."
"You don't have to set up an agent in Buildkite like in Jenkins."
"The documentation is quite helpful."
"The solution can be considered as a very well-polished platform with a really great UI."
"If you join our team, it's very easy to learn Buildkite. We have our own boilerplate, so you can just clone it and add your configuration steps. Plus, we have documentation available to guide you through the process."
"It is a stable solution."
"Using Buildkite, it's much easier to manage pipelines. It's straightforward to understand what each pipeline returns, making it easy to edit configurations, such as passwords. Although there is a steep learning curve initially, the overall process is still comprehensible. Additionally, Buildkite offers features like hooks and triggers; for example, an action in the app can automatically trigger a pipeline. These elements can be added to specific pipelines, ensuring the entire process is automated."
"Testing against multiple run times, versions, and environments is a plus point with the additional pipelines making it more interesting to see what is happening across your development process in a single pane of glass."
"The platform has some amazing features and the integration option makes it very simple to plug with any of our favorite tools."
 

Cons

"The way Buildkite represents workflows can be challenging. It uses Directed Acyclic Graphs, and there's a trade-off between abstraction and understanding what goes wrong when something fails. When a layer of jobs breaks down, it can be difficult to identify the issue at first glance. Additionally, logging can be cumbersome. I prefer GitHub Workflows."
"Based on the load, the agents can be scaled up and scaled down, and while they are scaling up, sometimes they just get stuck."
"There is a need for rework occasionally, and issues like syntax errors can occur multiple times, especially when manual changes are made in AWS or Amazon Connect that are not captured in the code."
"The solution should offer more options for installing an agent and give users the option of having a separate self-hosted or provisioned agent."
"Most of our projects involve both front-end and back-end development. We write the code and then create a file to set up our process, including specifying the tests we want to run. Before deploying to production, we need to install and configure certain things. We need something like Docker Pro, but I'm unsure about that. I'm familiar with the steps for using Buildkite for this process. We start by defining which tests to run."
"It gets very complex if you want the tool to scale automatically."
"As a newbie, I think BuildKite has several issues. For example, it can't get the status of a PR once it's closed. The syntax is easy to use, but updating a pipeline requires administrator settings, and viewing pipelines for others isn't straightforward."
"I would like to see some improvements in the hooks implementation."
"They could work on reducing the number of permissions required while using Bitbucket."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's per-user pricing model suits huge enterprises but is expensive for small to medium businesses."
"For a business plan, it was 19 USD per month per user."
"I find Buildkite cost-effective as it has definitely increased my productivity, especially on the deployment side. It saved a lot of my time and improved data management because I can handle different environments myself now."
"Buildkite is known to be cheaper than GitHub Workflows, which is considered a standard in the industry. It can be cost-effective, especially for organizations that heavily utilize Docker and containerization, because every code change triggers a new build. Its integration with AWS, particularly with ECR, and its caching capabilities with layers are powerful features."
"The self-hosted option is pretty cheap."
"We used the solution’s free version."
"I don't think the tool is expensive."
"The pricing is the cheapest compared to the other platforms out there."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Buildkite?
One area that needs improvement in Buildkite is the requirement for rework of the code. There can be syntax errors when running the Buildkite pipeline, especially if someone has made manual changes...
What is your primary use case for Buildkite?
I use Buildkite for deployment tasks related to building AMI images and deploying routing profile queues into Amazon Connect. This involves using Buildkite in conjunction with GitHub. We create fil...
What advice do you have for others considering Buildkite?
With two years of experience on Buildkite, I would recommend it to others due to its manageable pipeline and the support team available for big issues. I am satisfied with it, rating its stability ...
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Shippable
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
SAP, Today Tix, Cisco, Lithium, Pushspring, Packet
Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab, Google, Jenkins and others in Build Automation. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.