JFrog Container Registry vs Red Hat Quay comparison

Why PeerSpot?

JFrog and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Registry category. JFrog is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.0, while Red Hat is ranked #5 with an average rating of 8.0. JFrog holds a 14.0% mindshare in CR, compared to Red Hat’s 7.8% mindshare. Additionally, 88% of JFrog users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

JFrog Container Registry

Read 8 JFrog Container Registry reviews

3,409 Views
3,409 Comparison Views

88% willing to recommend

Red Hat Quay

Read 5 Red Hat Quay reviews

1,694 Views
1,694 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

JFrog Container Registry

Red Hat Quay

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 8, 2026

Red Hat Quay and JFrog Container Registry are competing container registry solutions designed to manage and store container images efficiently. JFrog Container Registry offers a more feature-rich environment, making it a preferable choice despite Red Hat Quay's strengths in pricing and support.

Features: Red Hat Quay includes strong security features, automated image management, and seamless cloud integration. JFrog Container Registry excels with advanced metadata management, extensive CI/CD tool integrations, and a comprehensive API for scalability and customization.

Room for Improvement: Red Hat Quay could enhance monitoring capabilities and streamline support for more diverse integrations. JFrog Container Registry might benefit from simplifying its complexity to reduce the learning curve and enhance documentation for better ease of use.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Red Hat Quay provides straightforward deployment and responsive customer service, simplifying setup with detailed documentation. JFrog Container Registry offers a robust deployment framework with community and team support, although users might face a steeper learning curve.

Pricing and ROI: Red Hat Quay is noted for competitive pricing and faster ROI due to lower setup costs. JFrog Container Registry requires higher initial investment but promises substantial ROI through its capabilities and operational efficiencies, justifying the cost for robust, scalable solutions.

To learn more, read our detailed JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay Report (Updated: September 2026).

Buyer's Guide

JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay

September 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 921,338 peers since 2012

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

JFrog Container Registry

Ranking in Container Registry

2nd

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

4.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Red Hat Quay

Ranking in Container Registry

5th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

3.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Container Registry category, the mindshare of JFrog Container Registry is 14.0%, down from 29.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Quay is 7.8%, down from 8.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Container Registry Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
JFrog Container Registry	14.0%
Red Hat Quay	7.8%
Other	78.2%

Container Registry

Featured Reviews

Sharath SK

Senior Consultant at Mettler-Toledo International Inc.

Eases artifact management and boosts SDLC efficiency with robust vulnerability scanning

When managing Docker images, I find that JFrog Container Registry has very low latency when pushing or pulling images, which is a significant reason we are using JFrog, along with easily configurable endpoints to the application. We don't use the replication capabilities of JFrog Container Registry because we tag different sets of containers for every release. Over the years, I have seen nice improvements to the user interface of JFrog Container Registry, and I hope that more additional capabilities come in the future so that we can keep using this tool. Currently, JFrog Container Registry does not support my AI-driven workloads as we haven't explored that direction yet, but it's a consideration for future purposes. We have plans to increase the usage of JFrog Container Registry in the future as we have other products in the pipeline, and once they complete the MVP phase, we will take the next initiatives. Currently, we only have two endpoints for JFrog, one from AWS and one from Azure. Overall, I would rate JFrog Container Registry an eight.

Read full review

AnilKumar13

Devops Engineer at EDAG

Integrated container platform has simplified module updates and has improved RHEL-based workflows

The best features Red Hat Quay offers for my work are that it is easily integrated with RHEL. This means we do not require any additional subscription for Red Hat Quay. If our environment is RHEL-based and we have already purchased the subscription for RHEL, it is better to use Red Hat Quay. Red Hat Quay has positively impacted my organization by improving reliability because it comes with the RHEL subscription, so we do not require any other, and it is easily integrated with all the RHEL-related tools like OpenShift.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"We use the solution to compile the codes before publishing them. We utilize third-party containers and codes, downloading them to the JFrog Container Registry. Developers then access it from the JFrog Container Registry, and there's a specific job responsible for running and validating all security checks, ensuring compatibility. If there are any issues or if packages require updates, we manage those updates through this system."

"It was a good experience with JFrog Container Registry."

"The best features of JFrog Container Registry include managing space efficiently when uploading the same files, and it allows me to upload and download using a threaded option for faster transfers than what can be achieved on the network."

"I have built an end-to-end CI/CD pipeline with JFrog and the registry on Kubernetes, utilizing Jenkins, JFrog X-ray, and more."

"JFrog Container Registry helps me fetch specific packages and serves as a source of truth for various JAR files, Node Package Manager packages, and Docker images."

"We have integrated JFrog Xray, and we use it for storage purposes."

"The most valuable feature of JFrog Container Registry for me has been the X-ray scans because when we ship the product, we need to ensure that there are no vulnerabilities in our application, and X-ray helps us find vulnerabilities in our containers or Helm charts."

"It supports multi-cloud deployments across AWS, Azure, and GCP."

"It's easy to use, and it does what it is meant for."

"Red Hat Quay's automated image building has helped my CI/CD pipeline efficiency by allowing me to store my source code from GitHub and GitLab to my images, making it easier to deploy and run the application without any troubleshooting."

"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."

"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."

"The best features Red Hat Quay offers for my work are that it is easily integrated with RHEL, so if our environment is RHEL-based and we have already purchased the subscription for RHEL, it is better to use Red Hat Quay because it also improves reliability and integrates easily with all the RHEL-related tools like OpenShift."

Cons

"The biggest friction point with JFrog Container Registry is sometimes network issues where I am unable to upload files due to frequent locks."

"One challenge we face is related to performance. Our integration involves GitHab and JFrog Container Registry, with pipelines fetching data from GitHub and JFrog Container Registry for third-party code. However, there are instances where this process can slow down the pipeline."

"Regarding features I wish it had, if I talk about the free tier provided in one of the smaller organizations that I worked in, I think that was very limited."

"While using JFrog Container Registry, one limitation I have encountered is that it would be beneficial to have enhanced capabilities for vulnerability scanning, such as proper categorization of SAST, DAST, and IAST."

"In my experience, there was a bit of a learning curve at the beginning. It can be somewhat challenging to install and get started."

"Pricing, purge of data or historical data, ease of usage, pricing model, setting the current pricing, changes in the configuration so that the pricing can be brought down, and better utilization of JFrog Container Registry are the issues I face."

"Scalability is fair, but not the best. I find cloud-based features to be better in terms of scalability than JFrog Container Registry."

"The solution's documentation available over the internet is not straightforward and customer-friendly."

"I think Red Hat Quay could improve the security, as users can download the images without a login."

"Nothing is happening regarding AI. I don’t see the role of AI currently."

"Red Hat Quay can improve its statistics capabilities. Currently, we don't have means to check the overall utilization, such as the number of repositories, frequency of usage for each repository, and which users are accessing specific repositories."

"It could be more integrated with other platforms."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."

"JFrog Container Registry is a very expensive solution."

"The pricing is somewhat expensive compared to its competitors. We use the Pro version."

Information not available

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Registry solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

15%

Manufacturing Company

12%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

13%

Comms Service Provider

Outsourcing Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	2
Large Enterprise	3

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	4

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JFrog Container Registry?

JFrog pricing includes self-hosted and cloud options, with costs based on licenses, subscriptions, number of nodes, and repository limits. Licensing costs are $3 per year, which I feel is reasonable.

See all answers

What needs improvement with JFrog Container Registry?

Regarding features I wish it had, if I talk about the free tier provided in one of the smaller organizations that I worked in, I think that was very limited. Unless you have a paid, pro, or enterpr...

See all answers

What is your primary use case for JFrog Container Registry?

My main use case for JFrog Container Registry is that we have a central repository where we store all our Git repositories and code bases. If there are other external packages that we need to inclu...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Red Hat Quay?

I am not facing any kind of issue with Red Hat Quay at this time.

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Red Hat Quay?

In terms of a specific example of how I use Red Hat Quay, we have an environment where we are managing Terraform code stored in GitLab. We run a pipeline and create a renovate pipeline which checks...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Quay?

If you are considering Red Hat Quay, my advice is that if you have a RHEL environment and you have already purchased the RHEL subscription, then you must use Red Hat Quay because it is easily integ...

See all answers

Comparisons

Harbor vs JFrog Container Registry

Compared 43% of the time

Amazon ECR vs JFrog Container Registry

Compared 17% of the time

Azure Container Registry vs JFrog Container Registry

Compared 14% of the time

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) vs JFrog Container Registry

Compared 11% of the time

VMware Harbor Registry vs JFrog Container Registry

Compared 5% of the time

More JFrog Container Registry Competitors

Harbor vs Red Hat Quay

Compared 27% of the time

Amazon ECR vs Red Hat Quay

Compared 16% of the time

Azure Container Registry vs Red Hat Quay

Compared 15% of the time

VMware Harbor Registry vs Red Hat Quay

Compared 9% of the time

Oracle Cloud Infrastructure (OCI) vs Red Hat Quay

Compared 7% of the time

More Red Hat Quay Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

JFrog Container Registry

October 2026

Download JFrog Container Registry product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat Quay

October 2026

Download Red Hat Quay product report

Overview

JFrog Container Registry is an enterprise-grade solution for managing software artifacts, deployed across AWS, Azure, and GCP, featuring seamless integration with DevOps workflows.

JFrog Container Registry is tailored for modern development needs, offering advanced code and vulnerability scanning through X-ray scans, making it a robust choice for handling containers and Helm charts. It supports cloud-native environments and is optimized for hybrid SaaS deployments, ensuring compatibility and integration with existing CI/CD tools like Jenkins and Kubernetes. Despite high storage costs and documentation challenges, its deployment efficiency in complex development pipelines stands out.

What are the most important features of JFrog Container Registry?

Code Scanning: Ensures secure and efficient artifact management.
X-ray Scans: Detects vulnerabilities in containers and Helm charts.
Multi-cloud Support: Deploys seamlessly across AWS, Azure, and GCP.
CI/CD Pipeline Support: Integrates with Jenkins and Kubernetes deployments.
Hybrid SaaS Adaptability: Offers flexibility in cloud-native environments.

What benefits or ROI should users look for in reviews?

Workflow Integration: Enhances the development lifecycle and speed.
Development Cycle Efficiency: Improves process speeds and meets sprint objectives.
Comprehensive Security: Supports vulnerability detection and remediation.
Cloud Deployment Support: Offers substantial multi-cloud deployment benefits.

In industries reliant on continuous integration and delivery, JFrog Container Registry is integral for ensuring secure and efficient application development. It's commonly implemented in sectors prioritizing rapid deployment, secure storage, and precise vulnerability management, such as financial services, healthcare, and technology firms, facilitating reliable integration and expansion in complex environments.

JFrog

Red Hat Quay is a reliable container image registry streamlining image management and integration across platforms, with a user-friendly interface and role-based access control for managing user permissions efficiently.

Red Hat Quay supports container image storage across platforms, including OpenShift. It offers features like automated image building for enhanced CI/CD processes, geo-replication for consistent access, and seamless RHEL integration. While its continuous updates boost performance and reliability, there is room for improved platform integration, AI capabilities, and security measures. Organizations use Quay for enterprise image management, enabling multiple organizations under a single account and facilitating CI/CD pipelines.

What are the most important features?

User-Friendly Interface: Simplifies navigation and management of container images.
Automated Image Building: Enhances CI/CD efficiency with streamlined processes.
Role-Based Access Control: Manages user permissions securely and effectively.
Geo-Replication: Ensures redundancy and access across different regions.
Integration with RHEL: Offers seamless compatibility with existing Red Hat systems.
Storage for Scalable Platforms: Supports platforms like OpenShift for scalable image storage.

What benefits and ROI should users look for?

Efficiency in CI/CD: Automated builds improve workflow efficiency.
Enhanced Security: Role-based access control and geo-replication add security layers.
Scalability: Supports growth with integration into scalable platforms.
Cost-Effectiveness: Use with existing Red Hat subscriptions enhances value.
Flexibility: Facilitates enterprise-level image management and multiple organizations per account.

Red Hat Quay is implemented across industries for container image management and application deployment. Organizations leverage its compatibility with OpenShift to manage repositories efficiently, integrate into CI/CD pipelines, and use it for development and training purposes. Quay plays a crucial role in managing Terraform code stored in GitLab, providing a comprehensive repository for diverse containers and applications.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

Facebook, Airbus, Dell, Slack, Volvo, Netflix, Spotify, T-Systems, Mastercard

The Asiakastieto Group, Akbank, TTTECH

Buyer's Guide

JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay

September 2026

Free Report: JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay

Find out what your peers are saying about JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

921,338 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay report.

See our list of best Container Registry vendors.

We monitor all Container Registry reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.