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

GitLab vs QuickBase comparison

 

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:
 

ROI

Sentiment score
7.0
GitLab enhances ROI through time-saving, cost-effectiveness, improved security, and agility, reducing time to market in the SDLC process.
Sentiment score
7.1
QuickBase delivers significant financial benefits by reducing costs, increasing productivity, improving efficiency, and enhancing business visibility.
Migrating to GitLab is bringing time-saving benefits, and everything is easier to automate.
We have saved time significantly, reducing deployment time from four hours to five minutes per deployment.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.7
GitLab's customer support varies, with paid options offering better service and satisfaction depending on user needs and resources.
Sentiment score
7.8
QuickBase customer service excels in quick technical support with extensive resources, despite limited weekend support and occasional delays.
We have rarely needed to escalate issues to technical support since GitLab usually runs seamlessly.
I have interacted with architects for some advice during the implementation, and they were prompt in their response.
I have had meetings where they taught me, explained things, and provided guidance for starting from scratch.
Technical support is really good, and I would rate it a nine out of ten.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.3
GitLab is praised for scalability, with challenges in specific deployments but generally adaptable to growing company needs.
Sentiment score
7.7
QuickBase is highly scalable, efficiently managing growth in users and data, with strong support for expanding applications.
It has all the features required for our coding and deployment needs, which makes it scalable to our changing requirements.
We're transitioning to OpenShift for future scalability with increased user numbers.
For scaling, other deployment options from GitLab's side need to be adopted.
Quick Base has high potential to scale.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
8.2
GitLab is praised for its stability and reliability, with minimal issues and high availability, ensuring user satisfaction.
Sentiment score
7.8
QuickBase is stable with minor disruptions, rated highly by users for reliability and timely maintenance communication.
I have not encountered any performance or stability issues with GitLab so far.
The updates are frequent and demanding, happening at least once a week due to security reasons.
 

Room For Improvement

GitLab users desire better integrations, reporting, CI/CD capabilities, enhanced UI, AI features, and clarity on pricing and licensing.
QuickBase requires better customization, UI, mobile experience, improved reporting, integrations, security, formulas, training, APIs, and cost management.
It would be beneficial to have a user-friendly interface for setting up these configurations, instead of just writing YAML files.
It is essential to conduct proper testing, such as unit tests and code coverage, within the SDLC pipelines.
GitLab can improve its user interface to make conflict resolution more user-friendly.
It can be difficult to navigate, and ideally, it should be simplified to facilitate use by anyone, not just certified individuals.
 

Setup Cost

GitLab provides free and paid plans with extensive features, with pricing starting at $19, appealing to scaling enterprises.
Enterprise buyers appreciate QuickBase's flexible pricing, but costs rise with users; negotiating tailored solutions is advised for large enterprises.
Even when working in other small organizations, we opted for GitLab as it was cost-efficient.
The pricing of GitLab is reasonable, aligning with what I consider to be average compared to competitors.
The price is high, and it limits user accessibility.
Pricing could be cheaper.
 

Valuable Features

GitLab is favored for its user-friendly CI/CD, seamless integration, robust management, collaboration, automation, security, and flexibility.
QuickBase provides code-free app creation, customization, and efficient data management, enhancing operational efficiency with PaaS capabilities and API integrations.
As we implement automated testing and DevSecOps, it speeds up the process by forty to sixty percent.
The Ultimate version offers enhanced features for security scanning through DAST and SAST analysis, which have greatly benefitted our project workflow.
By integrating GitLab as a DevOps platform, we have enhanced agility, improved our time to market, and different teams can work collaboratively on various projects.
One of the valuable features of Quick Base is its ability to function as a content management system without the need for SQL.
 

Categories and Ranking

GitLab
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
11th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
85
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (10th), Build Automation (1st), Release Automation (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (7th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (5th), Enterprise Agile Planning Tools (2nd), Fuzz Testing Tools (2nd), DevSecOps (1st)
QuickBase
Ranking in Rapid Application Development Software
19th
Average Rating
9.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
75
Ranking in other categories
Low-Code Development Platforms (15th), Employee Time Tracking Software (7th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Rapid Application Development Software category, the mindshare of GitLab is 3.5%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of QuickBase is 1.4%, up from 1.2% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Rapid Application Development Software
 

Featured Reviews

Rohit Kesharwani - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved agility and time to market with CI/CD enhancements
The CI/CD pipelines in GitLab ( /products/gitlab-reviews ) are highly valuable. Another important feature is the single source of repository, allowing efficient repository management and source code management. GitLab provides manageability by allowing us to manage source code effectively through separate repositories. Additionally, GitLab enables the creation of individual CI/CD pipelines for each repository, making software more agile. By integrating GitLab as a DevOps platform, we have enhanced agility, improved our time to market, and different teams can work collaboratively on various projects.
Bhavatha Ranjanni S - PeerSpot reviewer
Its extensive scope allows multiple users with diverse professional backgrounds to engage on a single platform
When learning QuickBase, I noticed a shift in its cost structure. It operated on a cost-efficient model tied to the number of users, with invoicing based on applicants. The recent changes have increased costs based on user activity, such as viewing reports or interacting with specific fields. This shift makes QuickBase more expensive to use as activity increases. Lowering these costs could potentially broaden QuickBase's user base, similar to how Microsoft PowerApps operates. The visualization in QuickBase could be enhanced. Due to cost and usage efficiency concerns, our utilization of QuickBase is limited within our company. A few individuals are currently utilizing QuickBase. We need to consider the cost-to-usage ratio and prioritize increasing adoption.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Rapid Application Development Software solutions are best for your needs.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Educational Organization
12%
Government
10%
Educational Organization
53%
Financial Services Firm
5%
Computer Software Company
5%
Manufacturing Company
4%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about GitLab?
I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitLab?
The pricing and cost are on par with other tools and are neither too expensive nor cheap.
What needs improvement with GitLab?
One significant feature we lack is the configuration that enforces code reviews, which simplifies the development life cycle. Unfortunately, this is available only at a higher license level than we...
What do you like most about QuickBase?
The most valuable feature of QuickBase is its dynamic form capabilities. These forms allow backend automation, making tasks like updating data based on specific conditions much easier.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for QuickBase?
Pricing could be cheaper. I rate it around a seven out of ten. Mainly larger companies use it, which influences the pricing structure.
What needs improvement with QuickBase?
The user interface of Quick Base is complex. It can be difficult to navigate, and ideally, it should be simplified to facilitate use by anyone, not just certified individuals. There is room for imp...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Fuzzit
Quick Base, TSheets
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. NASA  2. IBM  3. Sony  4. Alibaba  5. CERN  6. Siemens  7. Volkswagen  8. ING  9. Ticketmaster  10. SpaceX  11. Adobe  12. Intuit  13. Autodesk  14. Rakuten  15. Unity Technologies  16. Pandora  17. Electronic Arts  18. Nordstrom  19. Verizon  20. Comcast  21. Philips  22. Deutsche Telekom  23. Orange  24. Fujitsu  25. Ericsson  26. Nokia  27. General Electric  28. Cisco  29. Accenture  30. Deloitte  31. PwC  32. KPMG
Procter & Gamble, Tesla, Norwegian Cruise Line, Google, Metso, Agero, Kayak, PTC, Patra Corp, TomTom, Southwest Airlines, FedEx Office
Find out what your peers are saying about GitLab vs. QuickBase and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,168 professionals have used our research since 2012.