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 8.1, while Atlassian is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 5.1% mindshare in VC, compared to Atlassian’s 19.9% mindshare. Additionally, 83% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of Atlassian users who would recommend it.

AWS CodeCommit

Read 12 AWS CodeCommit reviews

890 Views
890 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Bitbucket Server

Read 26 Bitbucket Server reviews

2,576 Views
2,576 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Bitbucket Server

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 15, 2025

Bitbucket Server and AWS CodeCommit compete in the source code management space. AWS CodeCommit has an edge due to its seamless integration with AWS services, though Bitbucket Server stands out for its appealing pricing and substantial customer service.

Features: Bitbucket Server provides seamless integration with Atlassian tools, advanced branching models, and effective version control. AWS CodeCommit offers deep integration with AWS services, robust scalability, and encryption features.

Room for Improvement: Bitbucket Server can enhance its cloud-native capabilities, improve scalability, and offer more streamlined collaboration features. AWS CodeCommit could improve user interface enhancements, native code review capabilities, and reduce reliance on AWS for full functionality.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Bitbucket Server offers on-premise deployment with extensive support documentation, while AWS CodeCommit is easily deployed within AWS infrastructure with robust AWS support.

Pricing and ROI: Bitbucket Server offers cost-effective options for smaller teams with lower upfront costs. AWS CodeCommit aligns with cloud scalability through a pay-as-you-go model, providing potential for long-term ROI through AWS integration.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server Report (Updated: September 2025).

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

September 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 867,370 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

6.9

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

4.4

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 5.1%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Bitbucket Server is 19.9%, down from 27.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Bitbucket Server	19.9%
AWS CodeCommit	5.1%
Other	75.0%

Version Control

Featured Reviews

Munisaiteja Narravula

AWS Engineer at 6thgen

Efficient integration of code changes with seamless private repository management

AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly. It doesn't require any complex authentication, which makes the process seamless. Deployments happen in a straightforward manner once the code is organized correctly in the repository. The platform allows the creation of private repositories, securing and restricting access to our team members only. This ensures that unauthorized users cannot access sensitive files. AWS CodeCommit also integrates well when we use it with Check Point allowing us to implement information in the criteria we need.

Read full review

Dileep DK

Head of Engineering - Consumer Finance at DBS Bank

Facilitates efficient branching and integration with flexible workflow management

Bitbucket Server excels as a versioning system, effectively managing branching and code integration. It provides flexibility, allowing teams to customize workflows according to their specific needs. We maintain a master branch for production and separate branches for different features, which makes it easier to manage code changes. Additionally, its integration with Jenkins pipelines for automating builds and performing various checks enhances its utility.

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

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

"AWS CodeCommit is much easier to use than Bitbucket. It doesn't require any personal password or these things. We just need to put in our AWS account password and username."

"AWS CodeCommit's user interface is nice, and it's easy for people to pick up."

"The solution scalable."

"The solution is quite scalable."

"The most valuable feature of AWS CodeCommit is that it acts as a code repository with code versioning and approval features similar to those found on GitHub."

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

"The customer service and support for AWS CodeCommit are excellent."

More AWS CodeCommit pros

"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."

"It is an amazingly stable solution."

"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."

"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."

"Bitbucket Server integrates well with other products."

"The most valuable feature is that it has its own pipelines."

"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."

"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."

More Bitbucket Server pros

Cons

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

"The tool should improve its UI."

"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."

"The solution could be more user-friendly and cheaper."

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

"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."

"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."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

"The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive."

"There might be further integration ideas for continuous deployment."

"The platform's integration with other cloud services should be improved."

"The user experience is tedious and long-winded. It could also be smoother from an admin's perspective."

"It would have been better to use Bitbucket Server if it had something similar to the concept called GitHub Actions since it allows GitHub to provide seamless integration of CI/CD pipelines."

"The UI could be enhanced."

"Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time."

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

More Bitbucket Server cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

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

"The solution is expensive."

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

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

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

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

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

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

"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."

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

867,370 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Government

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

15%

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Healthcare Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	9
Midsize Enterprise	4
Large Enterprise	15

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap.

See all answers

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?

Understanding AWS CodeCommit was a hectic job for developers at first, while it was easier for the DevOps team. Even with access, they faced questions and difficulties navigating the service, indic...

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 absolutely things that could be improved in collaboration features in Bitbucket Server, with respect to people who are not using it every day, such as managers who need to be able to appr...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Bitbucket Server?

We use Bitbucket Server for storing code. It is a way to manage configuration items, keep track of code, commits, and pull requests.

See all answers

Comparisons

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 59% of the time

GitHub vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 29% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Bitbucket vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 85% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 7% of the time

GitHub vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 3% of the time

Git vs Bitbucket Server

Compared 2% of the time

More Bitbucket Server Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit

September 2025

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

Buyer's Guide

Bitbucket Server

September 2025

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

September 2025

Free Report: AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. Bitbucket Server and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

867,370 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.