Komodor vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform comparison

Komodor and Red Hat are both solutions in the Container Management category. Komodor is ranked #13 with an average rating of 9.0, while Red Hat is ranked #1 with an average rating of 8.3. Komodor holds a 4.1% mindshare in CM, compared to Red Hat’s 21.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Komodor users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 96% of Red Hat users who would recommend it.

Komodor

Read 5 Komodor reviews

1,322 Views
526 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Read 50 Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform reviews

7,099 Views
4,988 Comparison Views

96% willing to recommend

Komodor

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 13, 2024

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and Komodor both operate within the realm of container orchestration and real-time Kubernetes troubleshooting. OpenShift seems to have an edge in comprehensive features for deployment and management, while Komodor excels in specialized troubleshooting.

Features: Red Hat OpenShift is recognized for its comprehensive automation, scalability, and robust security features. The platform supports centralized control of container resources and provides user-friendly interfaces with easy deployment through OpenShift Operator. Komodor offers real-time monitoring and debugging, with features that provide clear insights and facilitate faster problem resolution. Its event timelines and notifications enhance the visibility and management of Kubernetes deployments.

Room for Improvement: OpenShift could benefit from a more simplified deployment process and reduced complexity for users unfamiliar with complex architectures. Enhancing user interface navigation and optimizing resource costs could also be beneficial. Komodor could expand its documentation and tutorials to better assist new users. Additional integration capabilities with various Kubernetes tools and improved scalability options could enhance its usability.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: OpenShift's deployment, though feature-rich, requires a certain level of expertise in complex architectures, with reliable customer support. Komodor is noted for its straightforward deployment process and strong support channels, which allow for efficient implementation and issue resolution.

Pricing and ROI: OpenShift’s structured pricing reflects its extensive feature set, potentially resulting in higher initial setup costs but offering broad capabilities for large-scale operations. Komodor generally provides a more affordable option with quicker ROI, focusing on cost-effective troubleshooting within Kubernetes environments.

To learn more, read our detailed Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Report (Updated: June 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

June 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 857,162 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

Komodor

Ranking in Container Management

13th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

9.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Red Hat OpenShift Container...

Ranking in Container Management

1st

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

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 Container Platform is 21.3%, up from 20.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Container Management

Featured Reviews

Jacek Kisynski

Senior Staff Software Developer at Visier

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.

Read full review

Prasad Gupta

Software Engineer at IBM Software Labs

Efficient deployment with resource optimization and multi-region stability

There are several areas where OpenShift could improve. The interface has numerous UI bugs that need addressing. Furthermore, the latest version has deprecated the deployment config, which has its own advantages compared to the deployment container. Lastly, there is no built-in auto-scaling plugin at the OpenShift level; this needs to be addressed as it's available at the cloud provider level, like IBM Cloud.

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

"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."

"The more time we use Komodor the more we save. Currently, we have seen around a ten percent return on investment."

"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."

"Komodor's multi-cluster centralized event timeline is the most valuable feature."

"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."

"For us, the fully automated upgrades are valuable. We have to maintain the clusters in production. For us, it is very important that it does not take too much time to manage all the clusters and do life cycle management and upgrades."

"The operating system has a live update and is more secure than any other. It's made for Atomic OS, a lightweight OS new to the market. I also like the source-to-image capabilities. The customer can directly deploy their applications from the repository. It's a highly flexible and easy way to deploy into production."

"The architecture is the best. The solution is scalable if you are on a container-based solution."

"The most valuable feature is that the solution can be deployed in the cloud which removes the expense of a server."

"More tools are available in OpenShift Container Platform to maintain and manage the clusters."

"The initial setup process is easy."

"OpenShift's core-based licensing model provides significant benefits regarding enterprise support and scalability."

"The tool's most valuable features include high availability, scalability, and security. Other features like advanced cluster management, advanced cluster security, and Red Hat Quay make it powerful for businesses. It also comes with features like OpenShift Virtualization."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pros

Cons

"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 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."

"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."

"I like the alerts that Komodor provides, but I think the alert interface could be improved."

"The stability needs improvement."

"The price must be improved."

"Container Platform could be improved if we could aggregate logs out of the box instead of having to do it through integrations with other products."

"The solution does not work on a route-wise NFS."

"Quality of support may be improved."

"The price needs to be improved in OpenShift Container Platform. When I choose this, the product is the first factor that we have to make a long analysis to compare the real cost for the other services. However, price is high."

"We encounter difficulties while accessing the environment and managing the cluster. This particular area needs improvement."

"I believe that the documentation part is an area with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"As far as I can recall, the licensing cost was fair."

"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."

"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."

"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 currently have an annual license renewal."

"I'm an architect, so I have no involvement in the pricing and licensing of the platform."

"The pricing and licensing are handled on an upper management level, and I'm not involved in that, but I understand the solution to be somewhat pricey."

"The solution is expensive, and I rate it an eight out of ten. There is a subscription called OpenShift Plus, which offers additional features and products the vendor provides to complement the OpenShift Container Platform. These include ACM, Red Hat Quay, and Red Hat OpenShift Data Foundation."

"The price is slightly on the higher side. It is something that can be worked on because most of the businesses now have margins."

"The pricing is a bit more expensive than expected."

"OpenShift with Red Hat support is pretty costly. We have done a comparison between AWS EKS (Elastic Kubernetes Services) which provides fully managed services from AWS. It's built on open-source-based Kubernetes clusters and it is much cheaper compared to Red Hat, but it is a little expensive compared to ECS provided by AWS."

"We paid for Cloud Pak for integration. It all depends on how many VMs or how many CPUs you are using. They do the licensing based on that."

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

857,162 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

Financial Services Firm

23%

Computer Software Company

11%

Government

Manufacturing Company

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...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Komodor?

See all answers

Which is better - OpenShift Container Platform or VMware Tanzu Mission Control?

Red Hat Openshift is ideal for organizations using microservices and cloud environments. I like that the platform is auto-scalable, which saves overhead time for developers. I think Openshift can b...

See all answers

What do you like most about OpenShift Container Platform?

The tool's most valuable features include high availability, scalability, and security. Other features like advanced cluster management, advanced cluster security, and Red Hat Quay make it powerful...

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for OpenShift Container Platform?

The current licensing cost for this solution is around $23,000 per year, per month. Regarding the current licensing cost, I would rate my satisfaction around seven or seven and a half; there's alwa...

See all answers

Comparisons

Portainer vs Komodor

Compared 82% of the time

Rancher Labs vs Komodor

Compared 16% of the time

Kubernetes vs Komodor

Compared 3% of the time

More Komodor Competitors

Amazon EKS vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 45% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Engine NKE vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 16% of the time

Nutanix Kubernetes Platform (NKP) vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 7% of the time

VMware Tanzu Platform vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 7% of the time

HashiCorp Nomad vs Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Compared 5% of the time

More Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Komodor

June 2025

Download Komodor product report

Buyer's Guide

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

May 2025

Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform report

Download Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform product report

Overview

Komodor is the missing piece in your DevOps toolchain - offering one unified platform from which you can gain a deep understanding of all of your system events and changes. We integrate with all of your tools, monitor changes and alerts and organize information on a clear digestible dashboard and provide you with the right context at the right time.

Komodor

Red Hat® OpenShift® offers a consistent hybrid cloud foundation for building and scaling containerized applications. Benefit from streamlined platform installation and upgrades from one of the enterprise Kubernetes leaders.

Red Hat

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Edenor, BMW, Ford, Argentine Ministry of Health

Buyer's Guide

Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

June 2025

Free Report: Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform

Find out what your peers are saying about Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

857,162 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Komodor vs. Red Hat OpenShift Container Platform report.

See our list of best Container Management vendors.

We monitor all Container Management 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.