AWS CodeCommit vs GitHub comparison

Read 97 GitHub reviews

3,549 Views
1,207 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 19, 2025

GitHub and AWS CodeCommit compete in the version control category for development teams. Based on feature set and user preferences, GitHub holds an advantage due to its strong community and open-source nature, whereas AWS CodeCommit is preferred for AWS-native integration with enhanced security.

Features: GitHub offers comprehensive features such as branching capabilities, seamless integration with tools like Jenkins, and a vibrant community for collaborative projects. In contrast, AWS CodeCommit is noted for its tight integration with AWS tools, detailed access control via IAM, and environment management, making it efficient for organizations relying heavily on AWS.

Room for Improvement: GitHub users often request better integration with DevOps tools, improved security features like built-in scans, and refined branching. AWS CodeCommit could benefit from a more user-friendly interface, enhanced third-party tool integration, and improved Insight Analytics for competitive advantage.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: GitHub's wide adoption is supported by extensive community resources, reducing the need for direct support, and it is typically deployed in public cloud environments. AWS CodeCommit, integrated within the AWS ecosystem, offers smoother deployment for AWS users and strong technical support for scaling.

Pricing and ROI: GitHub attracts personal and small projects with its free tier, offering private repositories and enterprise pricing for higher ROI due to community-driven efficiencies. AWS CodeCommit has competitive user and storage-based pricing, delivering cost savings to AWS users because of its integrated management, suited to diverse budgets and organizational needs.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. GitHub Report (Updated: December 2025).

AWS CodeCommit vs. GitHub

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 880,844 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

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

GitHub

Ranking in Version Control

3rd

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

6.7

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (4th), Agile and DevOps Services (2nd)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 5.0%, down from 7.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GitHub is 9.3%, up from 5.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
GitHub	9.3%
AWS CodeCommit	5.0%
Other	85.7%

Version Control

Featured Reviews

Uma Tulasi

DevOps Engineer at Huntington Bank

Seamless integration enhances team collaboration and process efficiency

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. Simple things such as viewing directory structures or browsing through commit history and pull request flow could use serious upgrades. We had to create workarounds for features that come standard elsewhere, such as automatically assigning reviewers based on code ownership and setting up required review templates. The search functionality is another pain point, as trying to find specific code across repositories is limited. At Walgreens, we had a large mono repo for our pharmacy services code, and developers constantly complained about how difficult it was to search through it effectively in AWS CodeCommit. I also wish it had better CI/CD visualization built in.

Read full review

Murathan OK

Software Development Manager at a media company with 10,001+ employees

CI/CD workflows have become streamlined and AI support has improved collaborative development

We are using GitHub because it is open-source software, which is the most valuable solution for us. The open source and community support are very good. We are always up-to-date with the community, and integration difficulty is very low. If you integrate any CI/CD solutions on GitHub, it's very easy. We started using GitHub about three months ago with AI integration. For our deployments, some developers can be very shy about asking for descriptions on their commits. We are using AI support for comments and deployment management, which is beautiful. We are not using the GitHub API for automating workflows in our projects. I give GitHub a five-star rating for the review capabilities. I also give GitHub five stars for integration with third-party applications. There is a lot of integration available on GitHub. If you want to integrate something, even if it could be integrated before GitHub, you can make your code and integrate your own in-house applications. It's a very easy and powerful aspect of GitHub.

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

"AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly."

"The customer service is pretty good."

"The solution scalable."

"The customer service is pretty good."

"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."

"The solution's most valuable feature is versioning."

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

More AWS CodeCommit pros

"GitHub provides enough storage for uploading the source code."

"The features of GitHub are very nice and helpful for developers."

"GitHub is easy, secure, and widely documented."

"It is very helpful, time saving, and user-friendly."

"It provides Draft Pull Requests for review purposes without needing immediate merging and GitHub Actions for CI/CD implementation."

"GitHub allows us the option to push files from a non-UA method or directly upload files from the UA. You can integrate GitHub with Jenkins to do CI/CD."

"Our code is secure."

"The ease of the planning board feature in GitHub is very valuable."

More GitHub pros

Cons

"Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price."

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

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

"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."

"The tool should improve its UI."

"The number of users for AWS CodeCommit is generally less compared to other version control systems."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

"When solving merge conflicts, it would be helpful to have tooltips within the actions to know what changes could happen next when resolving a conflict."

"The storage for this solution could be improved."

"There is a bit of a learning curve."

"The solution's cost is high and should be reduced."

"It would be good if there were training materials for junior developers."

"The support team needs to have a well-defined SLA model since it is an area where the tool currently has some shortcomings."

"The query function in GitHub is a bit stiff."

"From the recruiting standpoint, I would like to see email IDs and phone numbers and a brief introduction about their profile."

More GitHub 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."

"The solution is expensive."

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

"Regarding pricing, I'd rate it eight out of ten. It's decent and not too expensive, and small businesses can also afford it. With AWS taking CodeCommit out of the market, I don't see many competitors for small companies in terms of GitHub."

"If there are only 10 people using a particular repository, then GitHub is free. But if we increase the number of users, we need to pay the normal charge for GitHub."

"I think, in terms of price, GitHub is okay compared to other tools."

"We pay a subscription-based yearly licensing fee for the solution."

"There are no licensing fees for the features that we use."

"I use the free version of the tool."

"It is open-source. There is no license for GitHub."

"GitHub is a cost-effective solution."

More GitHub pricing and cost advice

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

880,844 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

13%

University

Manufacturing Company

Government

Financial Services Firm

10%

Manufacturing Company

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	8
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	42
Midsize Enterprise	13
Large Enterprise	49

Questions from the Community

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...

What needs improvement with AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is a good product to use when you also have to use CodePipeline because it is all integrated in the same system, which is beneficial. However, the integration with other code pipelin...

What is your primary use case for AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is a version control system integrated directly in the cloud environment, similar to GitHub, GitLab, and other platforms. It offers every single benefit of using any other version co...

What do you like most about GitHub?

The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code.

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub?

I was paying approximately one hundred dollars annually about a year ago. I am uncertain of the current cost, but GitHub without Copilot is free as far as I know. I am not paying anything for my Gi...

What needs improvement with GitHub?

Security could make GitHub better. OWASP Top Ten security advisors could be integrated on GitHub, and it could provide checks and advice. That would be much better. Additionally, LLM integration on...

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Comparisons

Compared 43% of the time

Bitbucket Server vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 14% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 14% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Bitbucket vs GitHub

Compared 9% of the time

Snyk vs GitHub

Compared 6% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs GitHub

Compared 6% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs GitHub

Compared 5% of the time

Aikido Security vs GitHub

Compared 4% of the time

More GitHub Competitors

Product Reports

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

AWS CodeCommit

January 2026

Download GitHub product report

January 2026

Also Known As

CodeCommit

No data available

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)

GitHub is a web-based Git repository hosting service. It offers all of the distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, and wikis for every project.

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob

Dominion Enterprises, NASA, Braintree, SAP, CyberAgent