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

Digital.ai Agility vs GoCD comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 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

Digital.ai Agility
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
14th
Ranking in Release Automation
13th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (9th), Value Stream Management Software (5th)
GoCD
Ranking in Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
15th
Ranking in Release Automation
10th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Build Automation (16th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites category, the mindshare of Digital.ai Agility is 1.9%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of GoCD is 0.2%, down from 0.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites
 

Featured Reviews

Debbie Brey - PeerSpot reviewer
A scalable, full-package solution with a tech support team that bends over backwards to help
There is room for improvement in getting the analytics portion of the solution more integrated with the rest of it. The feature I would like to see is already in their newer licensing structure, and that's the live integration between Agility, Jira and Azure DevOps. That's the piece that I think is really valuable.
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

"With some of the other tools, you have to buy 20 different plugins to get to the same capability that comes with the basic Agility capability."
"For visualization capabilities, the automation capabilities make it possible to support the different personas. The features and capabilities are excellent and come with excellent support."
"It allows my clients to have one central tool to manage their agile projects."
"Agility is highly flexible. It can do much more than what our client is doing with it. They use it in a defined way. Some at that company have a much broader knowledge of agile and SAFe, but they're given applications and a mandated way to work. We had to work within their parameters and provide an accurate transition so the data would be mapped and pushed through."
"It can generate reports showing a burndown chart, burnup chart, and the planned vs actual velocity."
"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."
"Permission separations mean that we can grant limited permissions for each team or team member."
 

Cons

"The machine learning features are a new capability but could be improved. This is being worked by Digital.ai currently. Multicolor simulation, specifically, could be improved."
"Improve how to create and track releases. Currently, I have to create child projects."
"The user interface can be improved by adding Save, Edit, Add, Cancel, and Return buttons to the popup windows that are displayed when you click on a child item."
"In my work as a contractor, it's always frustrating when a client has multiple software applications that don't talk to each other and they all perform the same function. That presents a huge challenge between their IT groups."
"It was not supporting some plugins. We wanted to migrate data that we were already using."
"There is room for improvement in getting the analytics portion of the solution more integrated with the rest of it."
"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."
"The documentation really should be improved by including real examples and more setup cases."
"It is difficult to assign different access levels because it relies on separate keys for developer and admin access, which could be simplified."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Comparing the pricing to other products, I think this solution is in the middle."
"You get what you pay for. Don't let your development teams dictate what the portfolio management team should use as the main tool."
"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 Application Lifecycle Management (ALM) Suites solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
20%
Insurance Company
18%
Computer Software Company
10%
Transportation Company
9%
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Retailer
9%
Recreational Facilities/Services Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Digital.ai Agility?
It was not supporting some plugins. We wanted to migrate data that we were already using. The migration of data and getting it up and running from the legacy system took some time to get accustomed...
What is your primary use case for Digital.ai Agility?
We were explaining how to set up the project itself, which describes the main use cases for Digital.ai Agility. This includes how to set up the workflow and how to manage and build a Kanban. I want...
What advice do you have for others considering Digital.ai Agility?
Digital.ai Agility has a bigger reach because it has many good integration points. It can be a one-stop solution for different needs, eliminating the need to use multiple pieces of software. Howeve...
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

VersionOne Lifecycle, VersionOne, CollabNet VersionOne, Digital.ai Continuum
Adaptive ALM, Thoughtworks Go
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Siemens Health Services (HS), Cerner Corporation, Aaron's, Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, Kelley Blue Book, AOL, Axway, Tideworks, bwin Interactive Entertainment, AG, Intergraph, Eos Group, PeopleCube, Liquid Machines
Ancestry.com, Barclay Card, AutoTrader, BT Financial Group, Gamesys, Nike, Vodafone, Haufe Lexware, Medidata, Hoovers
Find out what your peers are saying about Digital.ai Agility vs. GoCD and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.