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

Harbor vs JFrog Container Registry comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 2, 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

Harbor
Ranking in Container Registry
3rd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.9
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
JFrog Container Registry
Ranking in Container Registry
2nd
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Container Registry category, the mindshare of Harbor is 26.1%, down from 28.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of JFrog Container Registry is 27.3%, down from 30.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Registry Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
JFrog Container Registry27.3%
Harbor26.1%
Other46.599999999999994%
Container Registry
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2584182 - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at a energy/utilities company with 10,001+ employees
Enhance security with automated vulnerability detection and private registry support
We use Harbor for Docker containers to build from our GitLab CI/CD pipeline. This pipeline then automatically pushes to our Harbor instance. We are still working on storing Helm charts in the Harbor instance as well Harbor has improved our organization's security and stability in our container…
SS
Senior Consultant at Mettler-Toledo International Inc.
Eases artifact management and boosts SDLC efficiency with robust vulnerability scanning
When managing Docker images, I find that JFrog Container Registry has very low latency when pushing or pulling images, which is a significant reason we are using JFrog, along with easily configurable endpoints to the application. We don't use the replication capabilities of JFrog Container Registry because we tag different sets of containers for every release. Over the years, I have seen nice improvements to the user interface of JFrog Container Registry, and I hope that more additional capabilities come in the future so that we can keep using this tool. Currently, JFrog Container Registry does not support my AI-driven workloads as we haven't explored that direction yet, but it's a consideration for future purposes. We have plans to increase the usage of JFrog Container Registry in the future as we have other products in the pipeline, and once they complete the MVP phase, we will take the next initiatives. Currently, we only have two endpoints for JFrog, one from AWS and one from Azure. Overall, I would rate JFrog Container Registry an eight.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature of Harbor is its security scanning capability."
"Right now this is the leading product in this category."
"We have integrated JFrog Xray, and we use it for storage purposes."
"The most valuable feature of JFrog Container Registry for me has been the X-ray scans because when we ship the product, we need to ensure that there are no vulnerabilities in our application, and X-ray helps us find vulnerabilities in our containers or Helm charts."
"It was a good experience with JFrog Container Registry."
"I have built an end-to-end CI/CD pipeline with JFrog and the registry on Kubernetes, utilizing Jenkins, JFrog X-ray, and more."
"We use the solution to compile the codes before publishing them. We utilize third-party containers and codes, downloading them to the JFrog Container Registry. Developers then access it from the JFrog Container Registry, and there's a specific job responsible for running and validating all security checks, ensuring compatibility. If there are any issues or if packages require updates, we manage those updates through this system."
"It supports multi-cloud deployments across AWS, Azure, and GCP."
 

Cons

"There is a need for more support for public repositories, like the Google Cloud GTR, which is not as integrated as desired."
"The GUI needs to improve."
"The product should integrate better with other storage options."
"In my experience, there was a bit of a learning curve at the beginning. It can be somewhat challenging to install and get started."
"One challenge we face is related to performance. Our integration involves GitHab and JFrog Container Registry, with pipelines fetching data from GitHub and JFrog Container Registry for third-party code. However, there are instances where this process can slow down the pipeline."
"The solution's documentation available over the internet is not straightforward and customer-friendly."
"Pricing, purge of data or historical data, ease of usage, pricing model, setting the current pricing, changes in the configuration so that the pricing can be brought down, and better utilization of JFrog Container Registry are the issues I face."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The cost of the product is free."
"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing is somewhat expensive compared to its competitors. We use the Pro version."
"JFrog Container Registry is a very expensive solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Registry solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Harbor?
Harbor is open source and part of the graduated Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF) landscape, making it a cost-effective solution.
What needs improvement with Harbor?
There is a need for more support for public repositories, like the Google Cloud GTR, which is not as integrated as desired. Additionally, more example implementations for installation using Ansible...
What is your primary use case for Harbor?
We use Harbor for Docker containers to build from our GitLab CI/CD pipeline. This pipeline then automatically pushes to our Harbor instance. We are still working on storing Helm charts in the Harbo...
What do you like most about JFrog Container Registry?
It supports multi-cloud deployments across AWS, Azure, and GCP.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JFrog Container Registry?
JFrog pricing includes self-hosted and cloud options, with costs based on licenses, subscriptions, number of nodes, and repository limits. Licensing costs are $3 per year, which I feel is reasonable.
What needs improvement with JFrog Container Registry?
Pricing, purge of data or historical data, ease of usage, pricing model, setting the current pricing, changes in the configuration so that the pricing can be brought down, and better utilization of...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

AXA, Talking Data
Facebook, Airbus, Dell, Slack, Volvo, Netflix, Spotify, T-Systems, Mastercard
Find out what your peers are saying about Harbor vs. JFrog Container Registry and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.