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

AWS CodePipeline vs GoCD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 5, 2025

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 CodePipeline
Ranking in Build Automation
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.7
Number of Reviews
23
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
GoCD
Ranking in Build Automation
17th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites (15th), Release Automation (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of AWS CodePipeline is 5.3%, down from 8.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GoCD is 1.5%, down from 1.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Build Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Istiyak Ahmed - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamlined deployment through excellent integration with a straightforward setup
Our primary use case for CodePipeline involves deploying the different services, such as hosting a website on ECS or EC2 and deploying source code on container services or EC2 instances. We configure the source code with remote repositories like GitHub or Bitbucket, build the code, and store images…
Nishant Narayan Singh - PeerSpot reviewer
Simplifies the pipeline process, but the access control system needs enhancement
One area of product improvement is the access control system. It is difficult to assign different access levels because it relies on separate keys for developer and admin access, which could be simplified. The folder structure is another aspect that could be enhanced, as all jobs are displayed on a single page without the clear organization seen in Jenkins. Implementing a more structured approach to organizing jobs would improve user experience. AI could simplify job creation. For example, instead of manually editing pipelines as code, an AI tool could allow users to input variables and automatically generate the required jobs. It would help reduce human errors, such as issues that arise from incorrect edits in large code files.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"AWS CodePipeline's most valuable feature is its seamless integration with other AWS services, making it easier to orchestrate deployment processes."
"The most valuable feature of AWS CodePipeline is the flexibility of the configuration."
"The integration with other applications is fabulous."
"The best thing about AWS CodePipeline is that we don't have to manage agents."
"The product is a one-stop solution that you can use to integrate, deploy and host your application."
"Different applications can be enhanced with AWS CodePipeline"
"The solution's technical support responds whenever you have an issue, especially whenever you need something sorted out from their side."
"The product is cost-effective and integrates well with the AWS environment."
"Permission separations mean that we can grant limited permissions for each team or team member."
"GoCD's open-source nature is valuable."
"The most notable aspect is its user interface, which we find to be user-friendly and straightforward for deploying and comprehending pipelines. We have the ability to create multiple pipelines, and in addition to that, the resource consumption is impressive."
"The UI is colorful."
 

Cons

"AWS CodePipeline functions well, but there's room for improvement in providing technical support to regular customers who haven't purchased developer support. I mean, having it available for everyone, even if it's not a 24-hour service. It would be more useful if specific support hours were available for assistance."
"The solution could improve the documentation. Sometimes we have some issues with the documentation not updating after releasing .NET 6. We had some issues with building the code pipeline, and it was not updating the documentation. It's better to update the code documentation."
"In AWS CodePipeline, we can only use certain tools for which AWS provisions plugins."
"One downside in AWS is that when you attempt to push a change in, it misses that part, or it could be because some variables are not set correctly."
"In the next release, I would like to see fewer timeout errors."
"AWS CodePipeline is quite a simple tool mostly for management and creating automation."
"The product’s pricing needs improvement."
"If there are many dependancies involved in the setup, it may take a long time."
"The tool must be more user-friendly."
"The aspect that requires attention is the user management component. When integrating with BitLabs and authenticating through GitLab, there are specific features we desire. One important feature is the ability to import users directly from GitLab, along with their respective designations, and assign appropriate privileges based on that information. Allocating different privileges to users is a time-consuming process for us."
"It is difficult to assign different access levels because it relies on separate keys for developer and admin access, which could be simplified."
"The documentation really should be improved by including real examples and more setup cases."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of the product depends on how many times you run it. The tool offers a pay-as-you-go model."
"I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten."
"The product is quite expensive compared to other solutions."
"AWS charges you based on the number of pipelines you have and how active they are, and I also think that the root account user knows about all the price-related metrics."
"AWS CodePipeline is quite affordable. I've been running around four pipelines and the cost is around one dollar per month. It rarely exceeds two dollars."
"The pricing is manageable."
"Compared to other cloud services, AWS CodePipeline falls a bit more on the pricey side. I see that the price of the product has been increasing for the past few years."
"It is a straightforward approach where you pay for the resources you consume as they offer a subscription-based licensing model."
"It's an open-source and free tool."
"This is an open-source solution and it is inexpensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
14%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Computer Software Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Retailer
12%
Real Estate/Law Firm
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Which AWS solution would you choose - CodeStar or CodePipeline?
Both AWS solutions deliver solid options, with uniquely different features. AWS CodeStar allows for quick development, building, and deployments of apps. It also provides web application and web se...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS CodePipeline?
AWS CodePipeline's pricing is reasonable, and it is not too expensive. I estimated it costs around $5 monthly. On a scale from one to ten, where one is very cheap and ten is very expensive, I would...
What needs improvement with GoCD?
One area of product improvement is the access control system. It is difficult to assign different access levels because it relies on separate keys for developer and admin access, which could be sim...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

CodePipeline
Adaptive ALM, Thoughtworks Go
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Ancestry.com, Barclay Card, AutoTrader, BT Financial Group, Gamesys, Nike, Vodafone, Haufe Lexware, Medidata, Hoovers
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodePipeline vs. GoCD and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.