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

Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs Neo4j AuraDB comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jan 15, 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

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)
Neo4j AuraDB
Ranking in Managed NoSQL Databases
7th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is 16.5%, down from 16.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Neo4j AuraDB is 6.1%, up from 5.5% 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%
Neo4j AuraDB6.1%
Other77.4%
Managed NoSQL Databases
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Jeff Dalgliesh - PeerSpot reviewer
Founder at data2
Room for improvement in interface capabilities while rapidly solving domain-specific problems
Neo4j AuraDB is a great tool for understanding connections between things. The best features Neo4j AuraDB offers are that it is easy to quickly build a solution with their tooling. Regarding the tooling, I love how fast it is that you can use NeoDash to quickly mock up a UI, and it is really nice that you can build a GraphQL endpoint to connect it to third-party applications, such as Retool or custom applications that we build for clients. Neo4j AuraDB has impacted my organization positively as it has helped me solve problems much more quickly. A specific example of a problem I solved more quickly with Neo4j AuraDB is that I was able to work with an LLM to build graph data models for domain-specific problems. The collaboration with the LLM and Neo4j AuraDB sped up my process as I'm building a tool on top of Neo4j that allows me to control how I can access data in the graph, and Neo4j had a nice interface that allowed us to work with their underlying data model.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"With Azure being our main cloud, the valuable features of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB include integration with other Azure products that we're using and governance inside Azure. For integration with other products inside the Azure cloud, it was a better choice."
"The feature I have found most valuable in Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is its scalability and speed."
"The searching capability is exceptional. It is very simple and incomparable to competitors."
"Reading and inserting data into Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is a very smooth process."
"Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB has reduced our total cost of ownership by about half, allowing us to sell our product for about half of what we were selling it before, and Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is probably 70% of the reason why that's true."
"One of the nice features is the ability to auto-scale"
"The autoscale feature is the most useful for us."
"The searching capability is exceptional. It is very simple and incomparable to competitors."
"From my experience, I particularly like the professional version. Initially, developers often start with the free variant. Once the project grows, we switch to the professional version, which offers multiple databases, expanded memory, and better scalability. This allows us to handle more data and use cloud scaling features."
"I like the idea of graphs and nodes and the possibilities Neo4j AuraDB offers."
"The best features Neo4j AuraDB offers are that it is easy to quickly build a solution with their tooling."
"The most beneficial things in terms of AuraDB are its speed, its good pricing, the multi-cloud availability."
"Integrating the front-end language with Neo4j AuraDB is a very easy process."
"The most valuable features of Neo4j AuraDB include its flexible data model and broad language support."
"The tool is easy to use."
 

Cons

"The pricing of the solution is an area with certain shortcomings."
"A better description and more guidance would help because the first time I created it, I didn't understand that a container is similar to a table in SQL."
"I would like to see Cosmos DB introduce a feature that would convert machine language to human-readable queries."
"There are no specific areas I believe need improvement as I am happy with what I am getting currently. However, I am open to new features in future versions, like possibly integrating AI features natively into Cosmos DB. Any improvement would be beneficial."
"There aren't any specific areas that need improvement, but if there were a way to achieve the right cosine similarity score without extensive testing, that would be very beneficial."
"An improvement could include increasing the document size or providing a method to manage larger sets efficiently. If they want to keep a 2 MB limit, they should provide a way to chain multiple documents in a systematic way so that developers do not have to figure out what to do when a document is larger than 2 MB."
"Azure Cosmos DB could be better for business intelligence and analytical queries."
"Slight enhancements in integration interfaces, expanded dashboard functionalities, and broader use-case support would be beneficial."
"I would love to see a Retool type of interface builder with Neo4j AuraDB."
"I've experienced it crashing a few times, so stability could be better."
"There’s room for improvement in Neo4j AuraDB, especially on the developer side. The learning curve can be steep, and the interface for developing and pushing code can be unnecessarily complex. It might be beneficial to simplify this process to help developers ramp up more quickly. Working with graph databases like Neo4j can be more challenging than standard databases, particularly for juniors and those new to graph technology. Streamlining the development process could make it easier for new users to get up to speed. This would be particularly useful for teams with less experience in graph databases. If I could add a feature to Neo4j AuraDB, I’d focus on improving the Bloom interface. It’s excellent for visualizing smaller datasets, but navigating through it becomes challenging as the data grows—say, past 100,000nodes. The interface works well for beginners but doesn’t scale effectively for more advanced users of large datasets. I want a UI that bridges the gap between the easy-to-use Bloom interface and more complex, text-based tools. This would help manage larger datasets more efficiently and improve performance."
"During the product's initial setup phase, there were some issues due to disconnections in the tool's network."
"Some features can help if they can visualize graphs better."
"In terms of AuraDB, the conversations have always been around scalability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"From a startup point of view, it appears to be expensive. If I were to create my startup, it would not have the pricing appeal compared to the competition, such as Supabase. All those other databases are well-advertised by communities. I know there is a free tier with Azure Cosmos DB. It is just not well advertised."
"Pricing, at times, is not super clear because they use the request unit (RU) model. To manage not just Azure Cosmos DB but what you are receiving for the dollars paid is not easy. It is very abstract. They could do a better job of connecting Azure Cosmos DB with the value or some variation of that."
"Pricing is mid- to high-end."
"It is expensive. The moment you have high availability options and they are mixed with the type of multitenant architecture you use, the pricing is on the higher end."
"Cosmos DB is expensive, and the RU-based pricing model is confusing. Although they have a serverless layer, there are deficiencies in what I can define and assign to a database. Estimating infrastructure needs is not straightforward, making it challenging to manage costs."
"Its cost is transparent. Pricing depends on the transaction and data size, but overall, it is cheaper compared to hosting it on your corporate network due to other factors like power consumption."
"You need to understand exactly the details of how the pricing works technically to stay within reasonable pricing."
"The solution is a bit on the expensive side."
"I used the free tier."
"I am using an open-source version of Neo4j AuraDB."
"The tool's enterprise edition is very expensive."
"Neo4j AuraDB is reasonably priced, especially considering it removes the need for cloud administration and associated costs. It's a good deal for the professional version, as it includes managed services, which reduces the overhead compared to setting up your own infrastructure. The cost can be higher for enterprise-scale projects, but that's often due to the scale and complexity of the project rather than the product itself. Startups sometimes overestimate their needs and jump to enterprise pricing too quickly, leading to higher costs than necessary."
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
Legal Firm
12%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
31%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Educational Organization
10%
University
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business33
Midsize Enterprise21
Large Enterprise58
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Neo4j AuraDB?
The pay-as-you-go pricing model is generally reasonable and suitable for scalable workloads. However, users should be aware that pricing transparency alone is not sufficient. Subscription lifecycle...
What is your primary use case for Neo4j AuraDB?
Neo4j Aura (pay-as-you-go) is primarily used for research and production-grade graph analytics, including knowledge graph construction for complex relational data and graph-based reasoning and trav...
What advice do you have for others considering Neo4j AuraDB?
Neo4j Aura is a technically strong and capable managed graph database, and it has been valuable for research and production use. However, this incident revealed a serious gap between technical capa...
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Azure DocumentDB, MS Azure Cosmos DB
Neo4j Aura
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

TomTom, KPMG Australia, Bosch, ASOS, Mercedes Benz, NBA, Zero Friction, Nederlandse Spoorwegen, Kinectify
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB vs. Neo4j AuraDB and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,665 professionals have used our research since 2012.