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

Komodor vs Red Hat OpenShift comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Komodor
Ranking in Container Management
13th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
9.0
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in Container Management
12th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
PaaS Clouds (3rd), Server Virtualization Software (9th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Container Management category, the mindshare of Komodor is 4.1%, up from 0.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 1.8%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Management
 

Featured Reviews

Jacek Kisynski - PeerSpot reviewer
Makes it easier for our development team to "own" Kubernetes, saving our SRE team time
There's nothing in particular that is wrong with Komodor. It's hard to say that there's something we would really like to see improved. I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation areas will see further development. For example, where we can now see if the pods are over- or under-provisioned, I wouldn't mind higher-level development. I would like to see if we're utilizing nodes in the cluster, if pod allocation is optimal, how much idling we have, and whether we scale up and down efficiently. I would like to see them help us optimize costs further. Because, as our company grows and our clusters get busier and busier, any inefficiency is a lot of money wasted. That's definitely high on our wish list: anything that helps us track wasted resources. I am looking forward to using AI-powered troubleshooting workflow that Komodor unrolled recently.
Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Adopting a flexible and efficient approach with noticeable improvements in operational costs and continued challenges in job management
Currently, one of the biggest challenges we face is with services and jobs. For spawning batches, although it has crons, it is not easy to integrate with enterprise systems such as Autosys. The entire company uses Autosys, but we are not able to integrate it effectively. We need intermediate servers to run OC utility commands and initiate the cron job. We have to do a lot of modifications to ensure our batches work properly. With physical or virtual servers, even in AWS, we are able to write and manage multiple jobs. Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge. Integrating third parties is a challenge with Red Hat OpenShift. For example, with Elasticsearch, onboarding itself was difficult, running file beats and dealing with routing issues. It is not straightforward, especially since we have some components in AWS as. AWS has many capabilities that come out of the box and are easier to work with compared to Red Hat OpenShift. Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services. The main reason we went with Red Hat OpenShift was because it is a private cloud, and we have regulatory requirements that prevent us from using public cloud.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The service overview is definitely the most valuable feature. With it, I can see all the services and see if they're healthy or not without having to go specifically into each workflow individually. It has been immensely helpful for us whenever we've had network issues or other such issues. We've been able to use Komodor and see at a glance where there might be potential issues."
"Komodor's multi-cluster centralized event timeline is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable aspect is the speed with which I can narrow down what's going on. Usually, I look at the overview of events and then the timeline of an event and the status of the logs to quickly check what's happening or what has happened."
"The more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."
"The event timeline has been super helpful, enabling us to overlay node events in the same timeline as deployment events... That helps an engineer very quickly troubleshoot without having to do too much digging."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"Excellent GUI support, so one does not need to use the command line client for almost any tasks. Great support for building images directly from Git repositories with hooks."
"OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins."
"The company had a product called device financing, where the company worked as a partner with Google. It allowed customers to take mobile phones on loan or via credit. When we migrated those services to OpenShift in February last year, we were able to sell over 100,000 devices in a single day, which was very good."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"OpenShift is based on Kubernetes and we try to use all the Kubernetes objects of OpenShift. We don't use features that are specific to OpenShift, except internal certificates for the services. The one feature that is missing from Kubernetes and that is really useful in OpenShift is the lifecycle of the cluster and the ease of installation. We use VMware and VMware integration internally with the OpenShift installer, which is very good. With OpenShift it's easy to spin up or scale out a cluster."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the great customer service and the ability for our team to get assistance when we need it."
"The most valuable feature is the auto scalers for all microservices. The feature allows us to place request limits and it is much cheaper than AWS."
 

Cons

"I like the alerts that Komodor provides, but I think the alert interface could be improved."
"I would like to see improvements in how the product is installed. We've already communicated these things directly to Komodor. One feature we would like to see is for Komodor to be highly available on the clusters. Currently, it's only able to run in one instance within the cluster."
"Komodor's visibility could be improved."
"I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation areas will see further development. For example, where we can now see if the pods are over- or under-provisioned, I wouldn't mind higher-level development."
"One thing we don't have visibility into, which I would love to have, is metrics, such as user logins and usage. It's really hard to know what people are doing when I don't have any metrics on that directly."
"Some of the storage services and integrations with third-party tools should be made possible."
"OpenShift's storage management could be better."
"The monitoring part could be better to monitor the performance."
"I think that OpenShift has too many commands for running services from the CLI, and the configuration files are a little complicated."
"One glaring flaw is how OpenShift handles operators. Sometimes operators are forced to go into a particular namespace. When you do that, OpenShift creates an installation plan for everything in that namespace. These operators may be completely separate from each other and have nothing to do with each other, but now they are tied at the hip. You can't upgrade one without upgrading all of them. That's a huge mistake and highly problematic."
"They could work on the pricing model, making it more flexible and possibly lower."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"We experienced issues around desktop security, that stopped us implementing a new feature that had been developed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Other options pop up, but Komodor's pricing works well for our use case. It's fair, and we appreciate it. A lot of other vendors price their solutions in a way that would cost us disproportionately more money than they should. Komodor's pricing is reasonable in the way they calculate usage and value."
"As far as I can recall, the licensing cost was fair."
"The licensing model is fine. It is per node, which is good, but the pricing is high. Currently, I am fine with it, but I am a little concerned about the pricing as we scale. So, it is on the higher end. On a scale of one to ten, where ten is the most expensive, Komodor is a seven."
"We pay according to the number of resources we have; if we are a small start-up, we have fewer resources and thus pay less."
"We use the license-free version of Red Hat Openshift but we pay for the support."
"The model of pricing and buying licences is quite rigid. We are in the process of negotiating on demand pricing which will help us take advantage of the cloud as a whole."
"This solution is fairly expensive but comes at an average cost compared to other solutions in the market."
"The cost is quite high."
"It's expensive. It may be cheaper to invest in building Vanilla Kubernetes, especially if security is not the number one motivation or requirement. Of course, that's difficult, and in some business areas, such as banking, that's not something you can put as a second priority. In other situations, a Vanilla Kubernetes with a sufficiently strong team can be cheaper and almost as effective."
"OpenShift is really good when we need to start, but once we get to a certain scale, it becomes too expensive."
"The price depends on the type and the nature of the organizations, along with the types of projects that are of considerable range."
"The pricing for OpenShift includes support and licensing, which costs approximately $400."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Management solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
16%
Wellness & Fitness Company
13%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Media Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Komodor?
The most valuable aspect is the speed with which I can narrow down what's going on. Usually, I look at the overview of events and then the timeline of an event and the status of the logs to quickly...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Komodor?
The licensing model is fine. It is per node, which is good, but the pricing is high. Currently, I am fine with it, but I am a little concerned about the pricing as we scale. So, it is on the higher...
What needs improvement with Komodor?
There's nothing in particular that is wrong with Komodor. It's hard to say that there's something we would really like to see improved. I hope that the cost analytics and resource usage allocation ...
How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
Find out what your peers are saying about Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.