No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Liquibase vs Surround SCM 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

Liquibase
Ranking in Version Control
6th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
4.6
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Surround SCM
Ranking in Version Control
11th
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Configuration Management (37th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2026, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of Liquibase is 4.8%, up from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Surround SCM is 4.6%, up from 2.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Version Control Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Liquibase4.8%
Surround SCM4.6%
Other90.6%
Version Control
 

Featured Reviews

Antonio Tirado Peña - PeerSpot reviewer
IT Director at Instituto de Innovacion Empresarial
Centralized automation has ensured consistent multischema provisioning and nearly eliminated db errors
The syntax, especially as it is agnostic, is not always 100% transparent. In heavy object management, there should be improvements, and when we have large-scale multitenant environments, the orchestration becomes a bit tedious. But basically, for my use case, it is a tool I recommend 100%. For object management, the problem is the checksum, which has a very strict and sometimes rigid handling. Even if runOnChange is true, helping stored procedures when the code changes, any minor modification or formatting change should be a bit easier. Liquibase flawlessly solves provisioning, maintains consistency between dozens of schemas, has database version controls integrated into Git, has enormous reliability in auditing. However, it lacks native multitenant orchestration, it has a lot of rigidity in checksum management with programmable code, and the use of native SQL within XML does not work entirely well. I give it eight out of ten because it is indispensable and unbeatable for guaranteeing consistency and automatic provisioning in our multitenant architecture. I only deduct a couple of points for the lack of native multitenant orchestration and the occasional rigidity of checksums when modifying MySQL functions.
Use Surround SCM?
Leave a review
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
20%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
9%
Construction Company
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise3
Large Enterprise3
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Liquibase?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is easy since it is open source.
What needs improvement with Liquibase?
I have not found many disadvantages with Liquibase. However, it does not have inbuilt rollback management. You have to take your own backup and restore it if there is any failure. It does not have ...
What is your primary use case for Liquibase?
We are currently not using Liquibase, but we have used it earlier for database deployments. I have provided product information on the PeerSpot site.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
SurroundSCM, Seapine SurroundSCM
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Nike, JP Morgan Chase, Bancolombia, UPS, Anthem
Siemens AG, First Choice Health, CureSearch
Find out what your peers are saying about Atlassian, GitHub, Git and others in Version Control. Updated: August 2026.
909,153 professionals have used our research since 2012.