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

Azure Container Registry vs Red Hat Quay comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 21, 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

Azure Container Registry
Ranking in Container Registry
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
22
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Quay
Ranking in Container Registry
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
8.1
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Container Registry category, the mindshare of Azure Container Registry is 11.7%, up from 10.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Quay is 8.0%, down from 8.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Registry
 

Featured Reviews

Soumen Dey - PeerSpot reviewer
The whole package is valuable as it allows for easy application cloning and deployment
There is a need for a graphical interface instead of writing code in Visual Studio to create images. Currently, it requires using PowerShell scripts or YAML files, which means needing to know scripting languages. A single product combining Kubernetes service with Azure Container Registry could improve usability, making actual operations smoother. However, I haven't found any bottlenecks or problems with it.
SunilkumarSivan - PeerSpot reviewer
Experience with image management has improved application deployments
The best features in Red Hat Quay include the user interface and the RBAC facility, which allows us to control image access for specific teams. We have geo-replication in place, where storage can be replicated across regions, providing redundancy to prevent single points of failure. It is configured to ensure constant availability. Red Hat Quay's automated image building enhances CI/CD pipeline efficiency because all our applications are deployed through CI/CD pipeline, whether Jenkins or Octopus, and can pull images directly through Red Hat Quay using robot accounts and service accounts. This makes it effective from that perspective. Role-based access control is a major feature we have been using because we have hundreds of applications deployed in our container platform, owned by various application owners. Role-based access helps us restrict access to unwanted users within the organization. We maintain separate organizations with different types of access for users, including admin access, view access, and read access for every image. The geo-replication happens at the backend, while the front-end RBAC is managed through a single dashboard. The continuous dynamic sync runs in the background, though monitoring capabilities are limited to the storage team's purview.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Pricing is reasonable."
"The portability and elasticity features are the most valuable."
"The solution allows you to isolate standard containers, which is its most valuable feature. Azure Container Registry does what it's supposed to do and gives you visibility into the Docker images, the logs, information on pulling and pushing the data, etc."
"The most valuable feature is that it's easy to download, install and manage."
"It's running behind a big financial and legal customer, who runs Service Fabric behind a front door, servicing local banking containers on an ISV solution developed internally."
"We like the fact that this is a secure solution, that employs a token-based system, which can be used to manage all the applications under this product."
"Feature-wise, the security model and access controls are pretty straightforward and valuable"
"Azure Container Registry is an easy-to-install, easy-to-configure, and easy-to-deploy solution."
"It's easy to use, and it does what it is meant for."
"Things like downloading an image, pulling an image, tagging, and pushing it back to the needed organization are fairly easy compared to doing things through the command-line interface."
 

Cons

"Implementation needs improvement. We have a lot of open, online sources. Doing a deployment is easy for us. The only issue is when we have VPN connections and we try to pull the images from Container images to the local Dockers, it slows down."
"It's not an open source, and we pay per hour to Microsoft Azure."
"The solution has no areas that need improvement."
"It should be easier to use. It can have more graphical interfaces to manage containers. At present, the handling or management of the containers is very basic."
"The setup for Azure Container Registry was a bit complex. Still, the main problem was that whenever a new image was generated, that new Docker image needed to be updated in Azure Container Registry."
"The deployment is an area that needs improvement, as it can take some time to deploy."
"There is a need for a graphical interface instead of writing code in Visual Studio to create images."
"Lacks the option of having access keys stored in a master key vault."
"Nothing is happening regarding AI. I don’t see the role of AI currently."
"It could be more integrated with other platforms."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Azure Container Registry, has no cost, but you pay for storage service."
"When using Azure Container Registry, it was $1.5 or $1.6 per day, but I'm unsure how much it costs today."
"I would rate the pricing four out of ten."
"The product is competitively priced."
"I have no information on how much Azure Container Registry costs. I know it's the only solution my institution can use, so the cost was approved."
"Azure is a bit expensive."
"The Premium version includes some enhancements but is still quite okay with regard to pricing."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Registry solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Healthcare Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Azure Container Registry?
Azure Container Registry is an easy-to-install, easy-to-configure, and easy-to-deploy solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Azure Container Registry?
The pricing is on the lower side and not costly. Customers usually pay approximately $500 USD monthly, though this includes multiple services, not just the Azure Container Registry.
What needs improvement with Azure Container Registry?
The essential tools such as the VMs and Azure Container Registry meet our needs. We have not explored geo-replication features.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Quay?
From the AI perspective, it just serves as a container registry at this point. We are also looking for the possibility to retain a VM image from Quay, which is not possible currently. So, nothing i...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Quay?
We use Red Hat Quay as a single source of truth for all of our container images. We store all the container images that are used in the OpenShift platform.
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Quay?
I would definitely recommend it. Overall, I would rate this product an eight out of ten.
 

Also Known As

Microsoft Azure Container Registry
No data available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

DNV GL, Alaska Airlines, Finastra
The Asiakastieto Group, Akbank, TTTECH
Find out what your peers are saying about Azure Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.