No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cloudify vs Red Hat CloudForms comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 17, 2024

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

Cloudify
Ranking in Cloud Management
39th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat CloudForms
Ranking in Cloud Management
37th
Average Rating
6.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Cloud Management category, the mindshare of Cloudify is 1.4%, down from 1.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat CloudForms is 1.8%, up from 1.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Cloud Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Red Hat CloudForms1.8%
Cloudify1.4%
Other96.8%
Cloud Management
 

Featured Reviews

Ullas Soman - PeerSpot reviewer
DevOps Consultant at Coforge Growth Agency
Great at enabling a single platform to communicate with an entire infrastructure.
The best feature of Cloudify is that it enables a single platform to communicate with the DB, with applications, and with the entire infrastructure. The product is very stable and has a lot of troubleshooting and analytical features. It's easy to understand and user-friendly. If you want to uninstall something, it's very easy to have the logic created in Cloudify. Other solutions don't have this. For example, if you wanted to decommission after three or four years, rather than going for a full decommission, it's possible to unallocate a particular space. If you want to allocate storage for a new build, it's very easy to deploy, uninstall and release some storage from the TOSCA.
Ilhami Arikan - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Services Automation Technologies Manager at Garanti Teknoloji
A stable solution that helps to provision servers
We use the solution to provision servers.  I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs.   The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved.  I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten.  I would rate the product's scalability a seven out of ten and…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Extensible internal functions and plugins. Can implement custom plugins to fit your scenario. Python based plugins."
"We have found that this is not an undue burden, and the extra work gives immense flexibility and portability."
"It's easy to create a cloud server, such as Linux with JBoss or WebSphere, which is good for continuous deployment."
"You can use only what you need. You can remove certain Cloudify functions from the framework to create a "minified" version of what you need. This might only consist of the messaging delivery system, and the orchestration functions."
"TOSCA model allows modeling the application rather than the automation. It is a machine-readable representation of the application and its infrastructure, which can be used for other things too, not just for the orchestration (e.g. enterprise architecture big picture, who connects to whom)."
"No need to change the existing application code base."
"Valuable features are auto-scaling and load balancing."
"It has enabled us to create the DICE Deployment Service and simplified deployment of any other services (monitoring, continuous integration, etc.)."
"The multi-tenancy feature has been very helpful for our clients. It has been working fine and seamlessly for them. Its interface is also very simplified, and it is also an open and easy-to-scale solution."
"The stability of the solution is very good, and we haven't had any issues with it."
"The optimization of the solution is quite interesting, as it means we can prepare a bunch of VMs with self-service provisioning."
"Red Hat CloudForms is a stable product. There is no issue with the stability."
"I am impressed with the product's reports."
"The optimization of the solution is quite interesting."
"They are a very mature product."
"I am impressed with the product's ability to create dynamic catalogs."
 

Cons

"There were some issues with deploying the solution on OpenStack Mitaka."
"Cloudify is not a turn-key solution, nor designed as such."
"Unlike the Docker environment, Cloudify takes time for configuration and its learning curve."
"The solution could be improved with respect to error handling. If we want to troubleshoot further and deep dive, we don't have access to admin privileges to extract those errors."
"It lacked the user interface for multitenancy and basic platform management tasks."
"Install of the product itself could be improved and I would like to see better event monitoring."
"I'd like to see a more simplified upgrade process so it can be completed in one step rather than multiple steps (snapshot backup + snapshot restore)."
"The upgrading process could be simplified."
"Our clients had challenges or issues with the updates. Its updates should be better managed."
"I have issues with the solution's permissions. Unlike VMware, the product doesn't allow folder-type permissions."
"All of the areas of Red Hat CloudForms could improve. It doesn't do half of the things that it says it can do out of the box. It takes configuration to make any of it work, which is not uncommon for solutions similar to this. However, it is frustrating."
"The problem is that the platform requires it to be maintained and updated. Also, a few cases are still pending with the Red Hat support team since they are not closed yet."
"It is difficult to create a complete dashboard that includes all the needed features or catalogs."
"The solution's provisioning engine needs to be improved."
"The complexity of the solution is a bit high in comparison to VMware."
"Red Hat CloudForms could improve by allowing more customization of reports. We have to do a lot of coding to accomplish what we want. Additionally, the compatibility with the multi-cloud could improve. The latter versions of the solution removed Google support and the cost comparison between other clouds was high."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I wasn't involved in the pricing of it because we were just doing prototype work with it, but I was told by the upper management team that it was quite expensive. That was another reason we switched to Morpheus."
"Red Hat CloudForms is a bit expensive."
"It is definitely cheaper than VMware. Everything is included. There is no challenge there."
"The product's licensing is based on the number of servers."
"Red Hat CloudForms has a subscript-based pricing model. The cost is approximately $20,000 annually which allows you to use as many users as you want."
"The price of Red Hat CloudForms was not competitive, it was expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Cloud Management solutions are best for your needs.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Outsourcing Company
17%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Construction Company
12%
Computer Software Company
9%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Transportation Company
10%
Construction Company
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business3
Large Enterprise6
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise8
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Proximus Partner Communications (Israel) VMware NTT Data Metaswitch Spirent Communications Lumina Networks Atos Fortinet
Cox Automotive, Penn State, FICO, G-ABLE, Seneca College, ITandTEL, The Paris Lodron University of Salzburg (PLUS), MyRepublic, Macquarie, The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, CBTS, Network Data Solutions (NDS)
Find out what your peers are saying about Cloudify vs. Red Hat CloudForms and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.
920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.