AWS CodeCommit vs Liquibase comparison

Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Liquibase are both solutions in the Version Control category. Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0, while Liquibase is ranked #7 with an average rating of 8.3. Amazon Web Services (AWS) holds a 5.0% mindshare in VC, compared to Liquibase’s 4.5% mindshare. Additionally, 84% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Liquibase users who would recommend it.

AWS CodeCommit

Read 13 AWS CodeCommit reviews

772 Views
772 Comparison Views

84% willing to recommend

Liquibase

Read 5 Liquibase reviews

681 Views
681 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Liquibase

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 14, 2024

Liquibase and AWS CodeCommit compete in database change management and version control. Liquibase seems to have the upper hand due to its detailed feature set and ease of deployment, while AWS CodeCommit is praised for robust features and integration with other AWS tools.

Features: Liquibase offers powerful change automation, tracking capabilities, and specialized database management. AWS CodeCommit integrates seamlessly with AWS tools, provides comprehensive version control, and offers versatility within the AWS ecosystem.

Room for Improvement: Liquibase needs better documentation, more intuitive setup processes, and broader user support. AWS CodeCommit would benefit from improved performance speed, support for non-AWS integrations, and better user guidance for non-AWS environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Liquibase is known for straightforward deployment and responsive customer service. AWS CodeCommit simplifies deployment for existing AWS users but can be complex for others, integrating well within AWS infrastructure.

Pricing and ROI: Liquibase is cost-effective with good setup costs and long-term ROI. AWS CodeCommit is more expensive initially but offers high ROI for large-scale deployments within the AWS ecosystem. Liquibase provides value for database-focused projects, while AWS CodeCommit suits those needing comprehensive version control within AWS.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase Report (Updated: February 2026).

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase

February 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 882,813 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

Liquibase

Ranking in Version Control

7th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

4.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 5.0%, down from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Liquibase is 4.5%, up from 2.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
AWS CodeCommit	5.0%
Liquibase	4.5%
Other	90.5%

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

reviewer2797194

Software Engineer

Database-as-code has transformed how we track schema changes and manage controlled migrations

The best features Liquibase offers include CI/CD integration, which we really appreciate because we didn't have a lot of issues integrating it into our existing CI pipelines, and the changeset and changelog, which are the source of truth that effectively tell us how the database changes are taking effect. The CI/CD integration helped my workflow by improving visibility with the changelog and changeset. For the CI part, Maven and Gradle builds are already available, so we just use the Maven plugin and it was pretty straightforward. There is something called Liquibase Validate as well, which helps with pre-deployment checks. We use the update SQL command for dry-run approvals. Liquibase has positively impacted my organization by providing a way to manage database migrations instead of maintaining raw SQL, which comes with the issue of not being able to track certain schema updates or new table creations. With Liquibase, you have that history through the changelog and changeset tables, which maintain that history of changes.

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

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

"The solution scalable."

"It is a really good product where you can easily create your repository and integrate it with other tools such as IAM to handle the user and management aspects of the repository."

"AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly."

"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."

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

"The most valuable features of AWS CodeCommit include the least privilege access from IAM, where permissions are granted only for the specific repository the developer is working on, which allows for hundreds of repositories with controlled access per project."

"The customer service is pretty good."

More AWS CodeCommit pros

"Liquibase has positively impacted my organization by reducing the time spent syncing databases."

"They have some nice features around the automation of rule checking. They have a rules engine that checks the SQL code so that you can actually do your edit checks on the validity of the SQL code. If you don't want certain tables to be able to have certain things done to them, you can have it checked for that. It's a very flexible way to kind of do an automated peer review of the SQL code to catch things before you actually try to deploy it."

"The solution is easy to use, and it has very clear documentation."

"It will be useful for teams to automate and reduce manual work."

"Liquibase has positively impacted my organization by providing a way to manage database migrations instead of maintaining raw SQL, which comes with the issue of not being able to track certain schema updates or new table creations."

Cons

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

"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."

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

"When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide."

"There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics."

"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."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

"Liquibase could be improved in several ways. Some facilities could be enhanced, and for first-time users, it could be more intuitive rather than overwhelming."

"One thing we faced issues with is that Liquibase does not show the exact error, which added to the complexity."

"We were not able to delete some of the tables because of a security issue."

"Liquibase can be improved by addressing the issue that changelog files could conflict with Git if they're not modularized properly."

"The pricing is quite high."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."

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

"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 pricing is fair."

"Liquibase is an open-source solution."

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

882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

10%

Financial Services Firm

10%

University

Government

Financial Services Firm

24%

Manufacturing Company

14%

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

No data available

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Liquibase?

Liquibase is an open-source solution. If you are using Liquibase, you need to update its license. I think Liquibase is affordable for our organization.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Liquibase?

Liquibase can be improved by addressing the issue that changelog files could conflict with Git if they're not modularized properly. While we create one file per feature, rollbacks are not magical a...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Liquibase?

My main use case for Liquibase is database-as-code, which we use for creating table schemas, maintaining migrations, and ensuring that in production, if rollbacks happen, then it's more controlled ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 41% of the time

GitHub vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 28% of the time

Bitbucket Server vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 18% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 14% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Git vs Liquibase

Compared 24% of the time

Bitbucket Server vs Liquibase

Compared 21% of the time

Bitbucket vs Liquibase

Compared 19% of the time

DBmaestro Database Source Control vs Liquibase

Compared 18% of the time

GitHub vs Liquibase

Compared 16% of the time

More Liquibase Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit

February 2026

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

Buyer's Guide

Version Control

February 2026

Download Liquibase product report

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)

Liquibase is a migration-based open source database version control solution that relies on a changelog to track what changesets have been deployed to a database, and what additional changesets needs to be applied to a database in order to migrate a database schema to a specific version. Liquibase supports an XML model for defining changesets so that database schema changes can easily be translated to another DBMS platforms. As an open source solution, Liquibase is ideal for smaller teams and projects or for teams that have ample time to invest in extending and adapting the open source capability to meet their needs.

Liquibase

Sample Customers

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob

Nike, JP Morgan Chase, Bancolombia, UPS, Anthem

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase

February 2026

Free Report: AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

882,813 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS CodeCommit vs. Liquibase 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.