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

CircleCI vs Harness comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 11, 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

CircleCI
Ranking in Build Automation
13th
Average Rating
6.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
AI Software Development (203rd)
Harness
Ranking in Build Automation
6th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (16th), Cloud Cost Management (7th), Feature Management (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Build Automation category, the mindshare of CircleCI is 3.5%, up from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Harness is 5.5%, down from 5.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Build Automation Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Harness5.5%
CircleCI3.5%
Other91.0%
Build Automation
 

Featured Reviews

Manas Kashyap - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Engineer at Elevenxcapital
Automated parallel pipelines have accelerated deployments but complex configs still need simplification
CircleCI can be improved by making it less costly, as it is very expensive. The config complexity, like the YAML config, can become messy in complex projects. Making it simpler, much like having a Docker Compose YAML or Kubernetes YAML, is necessary from that perspective. Rather than keeping it a SaaS project, they can think of it through a Jenkins approach, where we can also self-host it into our environment, but it is acceptable. It is very expensive, and many organizations cannot afford it. The config complexity, like the YAML configs, can become messy in complex projects. A better DevOps person can only handle it, not a normal person. For that reason, I chose a rating of seven. It is quite expensive, to be honest. As mentioned, many organizations cannot afford it because of the parallel execution prices as well as the config complexity.
MK
Technical Associate at ZS
Templatized pipelines have improved efficiency while limitations in code-based development remain
Harness UI can do a lot of good things. Harness's UI should not feel very complicated. At the current stage, it feels very commercialized and compared to other platforms such as Argo CD or Jenkins, which feel much more lively and much more simple. Infrastructure as code or pipeline as code is something that Harness severely lacks. There is not a lot of good support for pipeline as code, and I often find myself not using pipeline as code the way other platforms such as GitHub Actions or Jenkins integrate pipeline as code. Pipeline as code is definitely one of the disadvantages when it comes to Harness. Additionally, the entire platform feels very commercialized, which is something that a lot of developers, especially open-source enthusiasts, might not appreciate even within the organization. One of the very important key factors I observed was that there is no way to execute nested pipelines, which means that we cannot execute child pipelines within child pipelines and child pipelines even within those child pipelines. There is no way to execute nested pipeline execution, which may or may not be required based on the use case, but it is definitely one of those features that I wish the platform had.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"CircleCI has positively impacted my organization by bringing in faster deployments, which means we can release faster, receive quicker feedback, and enhance collaboration and communication across the entire team."
"CircleCI has positively impacted my organization by allowing us to build quicker and do things quicker."
"Enables us to detect exactly which build failed and why, and to push multiple builds to our production environment at a very fast rate."
"It's a stable product."
"Some of the most valuable features include container-based builds, integration with Bit Bucket and being able to store artifacts."
"Running parallel jobs where dev gets automatically updated every time has helped our team significantly."
"The ability to automate the build process in a seamless way and run workflows effortlessly. It supports parallel builds so it can scale well. Also, it covers the basics of any build and integration tool, including email notifications (especially when tests are fixed), project insights, etc."
"CircleCI has positively impacted the organization, as it has been used for many years and serves as the main source for application deployment."
"Harness starts integrating with organizations, making everything automated without the need for manual interruption."
"It's a highly customizable DevOps tool."
"By adopting templates and various different pipelines across our own IDP platform, we have saved upwards of 30 to 40% of development time and also reduced risks of failures or error rates by upwards of 70%."
"Harness has positively impacted my organization as several teams have already migrated to it, and some are in the process of moving, reducing the dependency on one specific platform and making it faster with shortened build times and much faster deployments."
"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place, making it convenient."
"Everything in Harness is configured and runs smoothly."
"Harness integrates all functions like execution pipelines, environment checks, and log monitoring in one place."
"The features of Harness are valuable, supporting rolling deployments, basic deployments, and blue-green deployments with zero downtime."
 

Cons

"Billing is a mess."
"I rated CircleCI six out of ten because I think they need more transparency in pricing, as there are instances of unclear network data transfer and storage costs related to caching and workspaces."
"CircleCI can be improved by making it less costly, as it is very expensive."
"The solution’s pricing could be better."
"A return on investment with CircleCI has not been observed, and no relevant metrics such as time saved or fewer employees needed can be shared."
"Integration with Microsoft Azure is one area for improvement. Azure is growing in its user base, and supports various cloud infrastructure components such as Service Fabric, App Service, etc. Some of Azure’s deployment models (like Kudu) require a steep learning curve, but if CircleCI would come up with such features (deployment to App Service) out of the box, it would be amazing."
"There needs to be some improvement in the user interface of CircleCI."
"Infrastructure as code or pipeline as code is something that Harness severely lacks."
"When deploying multiple components to multiple environments, like production and BCP, failures sometimes occur. Improvements are needed when deploying one component to one environment."
"When integrating Harness with more than twenty applications in one place, it becomes less stable, causing improvements to be necessary."
"There's also room for improvement in debugging pipeline issues, which can sometimes become complex."
"Harness setup and configurations could be made easier to configure, which would be helpful."
"Even with automation, there's a requirement for manual change requests for approvals."
"Harness can be improved by providing more clarity on the credits it issues for Harness Cloud, as it has a tiered pricing structure involving license and credit costs, which can get confusing."
"I prefer the previous less compact UI version of Harness, which showed more details on the screen."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The price of CircleCI could be less expensive."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Build Automation solutions are best for your needs.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
University
9%
Comms Service Provider
9%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Financial Services Firm
29%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Retailer
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Large Enterprise9
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CircleCI?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that I only used CircleCI on the free tier.
What needs improvement with CircleCI?
I think CircleCI can improve in terms of pricing and needs to bring more unique selling points to stay competitive as there are many other cloud solutions such as GitHub Actions and Azure DevOps th...
What advice do you have for others considering CircleCI?
I really appreciate the good speed, which is faster and definitely the most important feature for me.To ensure that security and compliance requirements are met while using CircleCI, we utilize res...
What do you like most about Harness?
It's a highly customizable DevOps tool.
What needs improvement with Harness?
The first point for improvement is the steep learning curve, where concepts such as services, environment, pipelines, and templates take time to understand. New users often need training before bec...
What is your primary use case for Harness?
My main use case for Harness is continuous deployment (CD), specifically for safe, automated deployment to production, especially in Kubernetes and cloud environments. For continuous deployment in ...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Armory
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Shopify, Zenefits, Concur Technologies, CyberAgent
Linedata, Openbank, Home Depot, Advanced
Find out what your peers are saying about CircleCI vs. Harness and other solutions. Updated: February 2026.
882,886 professionals have used our research since 2012.