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 January 2026, in the Managed NoSQL Databases category, the mindshare of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB is 16.4%, down from 17.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Neo4j AuraDB is 5.3%, down from 5.8% 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 DB16.4%
Neo4j AuraDB5.3%
Other78.3%
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

"I appreciate Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's robust document management and consistent availability."
"The solution is user friendly and Microsoft's technical support is good."
"One of the nice features is the ability to auto-scale"
"We primarily use Cosmos DB because it's a managed platform service, eliminating concerns about hosting and reliability."
"It gives us a lot of flexibility. The scaling is instantaneous as well. You immediately have all the resources available."
"It's not a specific feature that I value, but the scalability of this system is the most impressive aspect."
"Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's most valuable feature is latency."
"The most valuable features for our organization with Azure Cosmos DB are multi-master capability for applications, automatic failover ensuring high availability, scalability, support for multiple data models, and low-latency access."
"Integrating the front-end language with Neo4j AuraDB is a very easy process."
"I like the idea of graphs and nodes and the possibilities Neo4j AuraDB offers."
"The most beneficial things in terms of AuraDB are its speed, its good pricing, the multi-cloud availability."
"The tool is easy to use."
"The most valuable features of Neo4j AuraDB include its flexible data model and broad language support."
"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."
"The best features Neo4j AuraDB offers are that it is easy to quickly build a solution with their tooling."
 

Cons

"Sometimes, the solution's access request takes time, which should be improved."
"It doesn't support all databases."
"There are no particular factors that need improvement. There is a little bit of a learning curve with scaling workloads, but it works smoothly."
"One of the most frustrating aspects of Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB right now is that you can only store one vector per document."
"Microsoft Azure Cosmos DB's pricing model is complicated, which people don't understand."
"The challenge for us is always scale."
"The query searching functionality has some complexities and could be more user-friendly. Improvements in this area would be very helpful."
"Azure Cosmos DB for NoSQL has a less developed interface and fewer SQL commands than MongoDB, and its community support is also smaller."
"I've experienced it crashing a few times, so stability could be better."
"In terms of AuraDB, the conversations have always been around scalability."
"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."
"Some features can help if they can visualize graphs better."
"I would love to see a Retool type of interface builder with Neo4j AuraDB."
"During the product's initial setup phase, there were some issues due to disconnections in the tool's network."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The customer had a high budget, but it turned out to be a little bit cheaper than what they expected. I am not sure how much they have spent so far, but they are satisfied with the pricing."
"This cost model is beneficial because it allows for cost control by limiting resource units (RUs), which is ideal. However, for our needs, we can't engage with their minimum pricing, which ranges from 100 to 1,000 RUs. At the bare minimum, we need to use 4,000 RUs for a customer. I would like to find a way to gain some advantages from the lowest tier, particularly the ability to scale down if necessary. It would be helpful to have more flexibility in cost management at the lower end."
"Cosmos DB is a highly cost-optimized solution when used correctly."
"The Cosmos DB pricing model, initially quite complicated, became clear after consulting with Azure Advisor, allowing us to proceed with confidence."
"Cosmos DB is expensive compared to any virtual machine based on conventional RDBMS like MySQL or PostgreSQL."
"There is a licensing fee."
"The pricing for Cosmos DB has improved, particularly with the new pricing for Autoscale."
"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."
"I am using an open-source version of Neo4j AuraDB."
"I used the free tier."
"The tool's enterprise edition is very expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Managed NoSQL Databases solutions are best for your needs.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Legal Firm
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Computer Software Company
33%
Educational Organization
11%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
8%
 

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 primary use case for Neo4j AuraDB?
My main use case for Neo4j AuraDB is solving water optimization problems for oil and gas operations. Neo4j AuraDB helps us resolve those water optimization problems by allowing us to store knowledg...
What advice do you have for others considering Neo4j AuraDB?
My advice to others looking into using Neo4j AuraDB is to consider how many graphs you can create as quickly as needed. I think Neo4j AuraDB is doing some amazing things. On a scale of 1-5, I rate ...
 

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.
881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.