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

AWS CodePipeline vs Harness 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
Harness
Ranking in Build Automation
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (18th), Cloud Cost Management (8th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2025, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of AWS CodePipeline is 3.6%, down from 7.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Harness is 6.6%, up from 5.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Build Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
AWS CodePipeline3.6%
Harness6.6%
Other89.8%
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…
Linwei Yuan - PeerSpot reviewer
Streamline microservices deployment with integrated execution pipelines and comprehensive monitoring
Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place. It is very convenient since we have many microservices, so having one platform for all of them is beneficial. The dashboard allows me to monitor all core services' deployment status in one place, making it easier to find bugs and check logs.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"I find performance to be the most valuable CodePipeline feature. It works perfectly and smoothly."
"I prefer using CodePipeline and CodeBuild in AWS due to their integration with AWS services, like directly deploying to ECS using Cloud Deploy."
"Code deployment is the best feature."
"The product is a one-stop solution that you can use to integrate, deploy and host your application."
"The tool's recent version helps us to run pipelines in parallel. The integration with other AWS services has greatly impacted our use of AWS CodePipeline. It made tasks such as integrating with Jira and provisioning instances much easier."
"The most valuable feature of AWS CodePipeline is the flexibility of the configuration."
"It helps develop CI/CD implementations with centralized management of code building, deployment, and version control."
"The integrations are good."
"The features of Harness are valuable, supporting rolling deployments, basic deployments, and blue-green deployments with zero downtime."
"Everything in Harness is configured and runs smoothly."
"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place."
"Harness starts integrating with organizations, making everything automated without the need for manual interruption."
"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place, making it convenient."
"It's a highly customizable DevOps tool."
 

Cons

"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."
"From my perspective, some in-built capabilities could be enhanced."
"It would be a much better tool if it could be made compatible with other cloud services as well since this is an area the product currently lacks."
"It would be best if AWS CodePipeline provided multiple integration options directly by providing some URLs."
"There could be a possibility of deploying tag-based conditions for different environments using the same code base."
"The documentation for AWS CodePipeline is lacking and makes it difficult to find information due to its complexity. It would be helpful to have examples in the documentation for different project types like Laravel or Django."
"In AWS CodePipeline, we can only use certain tools for which AWS provisions plugins."
"The support team’s response time must be improved."
"There's also room for improvement in debugging pipeline issues, which can sometimes become complex."
"Even with automation, there's a requirement for manual change requests for approvals."
"I prefer the previous less compact UI version of Harness, which showed more details on the screen."
"When integrating Harness with more than twenty applications in one place, it becomes less stable, causing improvements to be necessary."
"When deploying multiple components to multiple environments, like production and BCP, failures sometimes occur. Improvements are needed when deploying one component to one environment."
"Harness setup and configurations could be made easier to configure, which would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"AWS offers free business or enterprise support services."
"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."
"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."
"The product is quite expensive compared to other solutions."
"The pricing of this solution is dependent upon your needs including how many jobs you daily and how many times the developer will be changing codes and completing deployments."
"It is a straightforward approach where you pay for the resources you consume as they offer a subscription-based licensing model."
"I would rate the product's pricing a five out of ten."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Government
7%
Manufacturing Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business13
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise7
No data available
 

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 do you like most about Harness?
It's a highly customizable DevOps tool.
What needs improvement with Harness?
Harness setup and configurations could be made easier to configure, which would be helpful.
What is your primary use case for Harness?
In Harness, we are basically using Canary type deployments. We have applications, web applications, and web servers. Whenever we get the WAR file with 50 servers in a load balancer, Harness will de...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

CodePipeline
Armory
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Linedata, Openbank, Home Depot, Advanced
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodePipeline vs. Harness and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
872,778 professionals have used our research since 2012.