Azure DevOps vs. CircleCI

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure DevOps
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
Azure DevOps (formerly VSTS, Microsoft Visual Studio Team System) is an agile development product that is an extension of the Microsoft Visual Studio architecture. Azure DevOps includes software development, collaboration, and reporting capabilities.
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
CircleCI
Score 9.4 out of 10
N/A
CircleCI is a software delivery engine from the company of the same name in San Francisco, that helps teams ship software faster, offering their platform for Continuous Integration and Continuous Delivery (CI/CD). Ultimately, the solution helps to map every source of change for software teams, so they can accelerate innovation and growth.
$15
per month
Pricing
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Editions & Modules
Azure Artifacts
$2
per GB (first 2GB free)
Basic Plan
$6
per user per month (first 5 users free)
Azure Pipelines - Self-Hosted
$15
per extra parallel job (1 free parallel job with unlimited minutes)
Azure Pipelines - Microsoft Hosted
$40
per parallel job (1,800 minutes free with 1 free parallel job)
Basic + Test Plan
$52
per user per month
Server
Contact Sales
Performance
starting at $15
per month
Scale
starting at $2000
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Considered Both Products
Azure DevOps
Chose Azure DevOps
This is the first platform our dev team shared to us so I can't really compare but overall its such a great tool to have even if you are not from tech or dev team.
Chose Azure DevOps
We would use App Center for distributing our app to testers, and we could implement the same functionality as was handled by App Center, and as far as I remember we even had some automatic conversion of our jobs from App Center. After the conversion, we could see that Azure …
Chose Azure DevOps
We love the multi-tier hierarchy in Azure DevOps for tasks, with epics, features, stories, bugs and tasks all available in a nice nested hierarchy. It's not as pretty as Monday.com and doesn't work as well OOTB as ServiceNow SPM however.
Chose Azure DevOps
It is a similar tools with its pros and cons but does not really a differential - I would say it does the same but its own way, sometimes better, other times worst. It is a matter of preference or demands that come from superior decisions, so you just have to take it.
Chose Azure DevOps
Jira is fantastic for project management and customer facing portal. It is not good for pure development (no integration with Git, pipeline management, automated testing features). If DevOps were to integrate and adopt the project features of Jira as well as the customer facing …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps provides integrated environment vs Jira is dependent on third party for couple of features
Chose Azure DevOps
The moment I have been working with this tool everything has benn operating efficiently. The software development process has borne positive results under scalable environment. The cost of running Azure DevOps Services us much lower as compared to other tools in the market. It …
Chose Azure DevOps
ADO has better linking than Confluence and is adaptable for a specific need, whereas Confluence might be a bit more rigid, but it's also sort of along the same lines as to what can be done with both tools. ADO also had an ease of use to it and can do a bunch of stuff with it, …
Chose Azure DevOps
Jira is super clunky and doesn't behave in a modern fashion. monday.com is too flexible and doesn't provide enough feature set. AWS is the most competitive, but it's hard to wrap your brain around all of the features and offerings provided by amazon. ADO does a better job of …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps has a drag and drop editor so that you can quickly drag build steps into a build or release pipeline. This is much faster than looking up the correct yaml syntax. Additionally, its support for Microsoft and Azure is great. If you're on the .net stack or you use …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps has more services and better integration with other tools. When it. Comes to the overall software development process management ecosystem.
Chose Azure DevOps
As a cloud services user of Azure, using Azure DevOps made sense because it has the most support tailored for Azure ecosystem.
Chose Azure DevOps
Microsoft Planner is used by project managers and IT service managers across our organization for task tracking and running their team meetings. Azure DevOps works better than Planner for software development teams but might possibly be too complex for non-software teams or …
Chose Azure DevOps
Graphically it overtakes the grade of traceability of artifacts delivered to environments More user-friendly to orchestrate the deliveries.
Chose Azure DevOps
Trello is simple to use, but it's only for a Kanban board. Jira might be the same, but I don't really have enough experience with Jira to fully compare them. When I used it, it missed certain functionalities that I was used to in Azure DevOps. Visually it's a lot different too.
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps Services have huge functionality and are well supported by Microsoft as well. You will get plenty of features in the marketplace and learning documentation.
Chose Azure DevOps
Writing the Docker Images, Storing them in Azure Container Registry and then Deploying onto Azure Kubernetes Services is an Easier process which no other software/product is currently providing in the market. Best till date in terms of End to End deployment and maintaining …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps is widely used because of its collaboration and integration with various other tools. Here the assign of the sub task is quite easy compare to Jira. Also Azure Devops can we integrate easily with Git for better code representation and versioning. It reporting is …
Chose Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps is a completed product and ecosystem. It offers a robust ecosystem that does everything that is needed. The above products do lack features like pipelines tasks, third-party integrations. Besides all cloud benefits, the main advantage of Azure DevOps Services …
Chose Azure DevOps
Currently, we use both products, however, we use more the Atlassian suite. We have started recently using Azure DevOps for specific implementations and projects. We don't have any plan yet to migrate all our projects to Azure DevOps, we may in the next couple of years. …
Chose Azure DevOps
We tested alternatives for Azure DevOps over time. We tested GitHub a while ago and back then lack of some features that now hast, like the project boards and private repositories. We will check GitHub next year.

We also tested AWS CodeCommit and found it very cryptic, …
Chose Azure DevOps
Beside all cloud benefits, the main advantage Azure DevOps Services compared to Azure DevOps Server is the easier remote access for third party team members, and always up to date software.
On the other hand, on prem deployment (Azure DevOps Server) makes complex access or …
Chose Azure DevOps
The greatest strength of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) is that it's a one-stop solution for all agile project management instead of setting up bits of different software put together for each and every need. Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) has a great ecosystem …
Chose Azure DevOps
I prefer Azure Devops over all other code repository / ci/cd systems that I've used in the past. All features are integrated into a single service (back log, repo mgmt, deployment pipelines, artifacts, etc.). The tools are easy to use and super powerful.
Chose Azure DevOps
Our company is already using a lot of Azure services and it makes more sense to start using Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) when we needed a CI/CD tool. We tested different features of Azure DevOps Services (formerly VSTS) and found out that the build and release …
CircleCI
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI shines with its specialized infrastructure. Its dedicated macOS runners ensure blazing-fast iOS builds, while intelligent Docker layer caching significantly reduces backend build times and costs. The ability to SSH directly into failed builds dramatically accelerates …
Chose CircleCI
Based on the cost for feature set that we needed we went with CircleCI. There were also more people on our team that knew how to use CircleCI already compared to other products which made it a preferred choice for ramp up. Other products were not as robust and quick to …
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI is the only product we've used.
Chose CircleCI
We use CircleCI when we need a good, independent CI/CD provider in an existing workflow. That said, we've begun investing more heavily in GitHub actions as it's closer to where our code is stored. CircleCI is a feature of a workflow, and can be filled by many different service …
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI is a sass product which means you don't need to maintain your own servers. This can also be a negative as you are dependent on their service. This also means you can't ssh into a machine to see what went wrong like you can with Jenkins. However for most users this …
Chose CircleCI
Because the Travis CI features are not very good, it has a lot of problems with concurrency and the uptime of the on-cloud solution was the worst we have ever tried.
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI is still being developed and worked on continually while TravisCI is not.
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI seemed to have a quicker setup than other similar products, with a good integration with GitHub repos. Projects are quick and easy to set up within the UI, and workflows can then be created off the back of those fairly intuitively. Clever interpretation of commit …
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI is the company that is innovating compared to the other ones. I think it's a great piece of software compared to other open source options that don't have as much functionality and improved capability over time.
Chose CircleCI
While the UI on CircleCI is not my favorite, it's leagues better than Travis CI. I really like Heroku CI much better, but the functionality is much more limited there. If Heroku CI had the same functionality as CircleCI, I probably wouldn't use CircleCI.
Chose CircleCI
Jenkins and Teamcity both have additional features that maybe you require, but they are also a lot more work to get set up and working. There's a much longer learning curve to getting these configured for a simple build. They're not hosted, so you have to maintain the …
Chose CircleCI
CircleCI does a lot of what we need it to do; however, I believe Jenkins is a better Continuous Integration tool. Jenkins has more capabilities and integrations. In addition, Jenkins is a much more widely used tool, which means more developers are familiar with it and have …
Chose CircleCI
Not having to manage / deal with a Jenkins server is fantastic. I don't have much personally against Jenkins. I've set up and run a Jenkins server before. It's just complexity that doesn't really have much to do with the business beyond getting our software to our customers. My …
Chose CircleCI
Since CircleCI gave us its infrastructure we don't have to worry about servers, provisioning and maintenance. Also CircleCI provides us great features to increase speed of builds by adding more containers to the build. Jenkins is the best open source alternative but it requires …
Chose CircleCI
Jenkins is usually self-hosted, Travis CI's infrastructure is largely unreliable (lots of tests time out for no discernable reason), and Semaphore encourages you to configure your CI/CD from a web UI. We like CircleCI because its hosted, our tests run largely as expected on …
Chose CircleCI
It was our CTO who did the evaluation, not me, but as I recall other services weren't as parallelizable. We knew we wanted to run on many containers simultaneously for fast test results.
Chose CircleCI
For us it really came down to CricleCI being the fastest and simples tool to get started with. The GitHub integration is slick and seamless and the scripting config file allowed us to configure our entire build system, including tests, in less than a day. It's very light weight …
Chose CircleCI
Circle was the first CI with simple setup, great documentation, and tight integration with Github. Using Jenkins was too much maintenance and overhead, TeamCity was limited in how we could customize it and run concurrent builds, TravisCI was not available for private repos when …
Chose CircleCI
Travis has full YML configuration in areas where CircleCI is slightly lacking still, which is great, but CircleCI offers more features, settings, and potential performance.

Codeship is simpler to use, you can use it entirely from their UI without modifying your Git repository at …
Chose CircleCI
Travis CI is great for open source projects – it's completely free, but CircleCI offers some support for closed projects as well. CircleCI has cheaper pricing plans, and you are able to customize them as much as you want. At Travis CI you can select only a predefined amount of …
Chose CircleCI
The biggest downside to CircleCI is that it doesn't support parameterized builds, that is testing your code against language version X and Y, or framework version A and B. Beyond that, it is really a great product.
Chose CircleCI
I had used Travis CI in some of my open source projects. However, it was too expensive for us so I looked for an alternative that was in our budget. Scrutinizer is also very useful, but also out of our budget. When we get larger I could see myself using Scrutinizer for quality …
Chose CircleCI
I think these three tools are just as good as the other except that Travis CI supports mobile a lot better but price wise, CircleCI is the best that I have found and is supports the need for a startup. For a long while, CircleCI had Docker support before Codeship but now, …
Best Alternatives
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Small Businesses
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitHub
GitHub
Score 9.2 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.4 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Likelihood to Recommend
8.8
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.3
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
7.8
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.1
(0 ratings)
6.9
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure DevOpsCircleCI
Likelihood to Recommend
DevOps is much more user friendly than Git itself. There is a more GUI-centric interface, tighter integration with the Azure / Entra architecture. For those of use in the Microsoft-sphere, it really is excellent for code-centric project management. I rate this as an 8 because it does not seem quite as well suited for fully functional / non-code project aspects in implementation. Nor does it have customer / end-user portal / front end for easy reporting and insight.
Read full review
CircleCI is perfect for a CI/CD pipeline for an app using a standard build process. It'll take more work for a complex build process, but should still be up to the task unless you need a lot of integrations with other tools. If you have a big team and can spare someone to focus full time on just the CI/CD tools, maybe something like Jenkins is better, but if you're just looking to get your app built, tested, and delivered without a huge amount of effort, CircleCI is probably your preferred tool.
Read full review
Pros
  • Flexible Requirements Hierarchy Management: AZDO makes it easy to track items such as features or epics as a flat list, or as a hierarchy in which you can track the parent-child relationship.
  • Fast Data Entry: AZDO was designed to facilitate quick data entry to capture work items quickly, while still enabling detailed capture of acceptance criteria and item properties.
  • Excel Integration: AZDO stands out for its integration with MS Excel, which enables quick updates for bulk items.
Read full review
  • GitHub integration is seamless. Never had a problem with it missing commits.
  • Robust test environment. I used Travis in the past but tests would sporadically time out for no clear reason, haven't had that happen with CircleCI
  • Poweful YAML-based configuration in the GitHub repo itself. I don't like CI tools like Semaphore that push you into managing your CI/CD through a web UI, I prefer managing a config file and never having to log in to the CI tool.
Read full review
Cons
  • I did mention it has good visibility in terms of linking, but sometimes items do get lost, so if there was a better way to manage that, that would be great.
  • The wiki is not the prettiest thing to look at, so it could have refinements there.
  • It could improve the search slightly better.
Read full review
  • It would be nice if you could configure everything via the YML file. Some things are only available via YML, and some things are actually only available in the UI, and many other things have full overlap between the two. I'm sure there are good reasons for this, but this is a pretty confusing situation. For example, certain PHP versions are only available on certain Ubuntu releases. Configuring the PHP version is done via the .yml file, but configuring the Ubuntu release being used for the build has to be done in the UI. This can easily lead to things not building properly.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
I don't think our organization will stray from using VSTS/TFS as we are now looking to upgrade to the 2012 version. Since our business is software development and we want to meet the requirements of CMMI to deliver consistent and high quality software, this SDLC management tool is here to stay. In addition, our company uses a lot of Microsoft products, such as Office 365, Asp.net, etc, and since VSTS/TFS has proved itself invaluable to our own processes and is within the Microsoft family of products, we will continue to use VSTS/TFS for a long, long time.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
It's a great help to get more information about new feature release and stay updated on what the dev team is working on. I like how easy it is to just login and read through the work items. Each work item has basic details: Title, Description, Assigned to, State, Area (what it belongs to), and iteration (when it’s worked on). See image above.They move through different states (New → Discovery → Ready for Prod → etc.).
Read full review
The reliability & speed, it just works. The ability to spin up macOS runners and Docker containers on demand without managing hardware is a huge win. The Orbs system makes integrating with AWS and Slack incredibly easy, saving us weeks of custom scripting and providing real-time updates in our Slack channel. This makes it easy for us to track and ensures that everyone involved knows the status. Of course, it has drawbacks related to configuration complexity and, in some cases, cost transparency, but overall, it is an industry-standard, robust tool that solves our core infrastructure problems well.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
It's pretty snappy, even with using workflows with multiple steps and different docker images. I've seen builds take a long time if it's really involved, but from what I can tell, it's still at least on par if not faster than other build tools.
Read full review
Support Rating
When we've had issues, both Microsoft support and the user community have been very responsive. DevOps has an active developer community and frankly, you can find most of your questions already asked and answered there. Microsoft also does a better job than most software vendors I've worked with creating detailed and frequently updated documentation.
Read full review
Unless you have a reasonably large account, you're going to be mainly stuck reading their documentation. Which has improved somewhat over the years but is still extremely limited compared to a platform like Digital Ocean who invested in the documentation and a community to ensure it's kept up to date. If you can't find your answer there, you can be stuck.
Read full review
Implementation Rating
Was not part of the process.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
We love the multi-tier hierarchy in Azure DevOps for tasks, with epics, features, stories, bugs and tasks all available in a nice nested hierarchy. It's not as pretty as monday.com and doesn't work as well OOTB as ServiceNow SPM however.
Read full review
CircleCI shines with its specialized infrastructure. Its dedicated macOS runners ensure blazing-fast iOS builds, while intelligent Docker layer caching significantly reduces backend build times and costs. The ability to SSH directly into failed builds dramatically accelerates debugging. Furthermore, its certified Orbs provide standardized, secure integrations with AWS and Slack, reducing the stability and security risks often associated with unverified community plugins on competing platforms such as GitHub Actions.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Increased dev team efficiency through more streamlined development processes and task automation.
  • Improved quality of software deployments due to better source control, automated testing, and release management options available in DevOps.
  • Better collaboration between the dev team, business analysts, and agile project managers.
Read full review
  • Continuous Integration saves time for developers to manually handle deploying code.
  • Ability to build complex workflows with test suites catches bugs before they get to production - saving a lot of headache.
  • The integrations with Slack and DataDog keep the entire company informed of builds and deploys, increasing our awareness and efficiency.
Read full review
ScreenShots