CircleCI vs. CloudBees Codeship

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
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
CloudBees Codeship
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Codeship from CloudBees is a build automation platform from the Austrian company of the same name.N/A
Pricing
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Editions & Modules
Server
Contact Sales
Performance
starting at $15
per month
Scale
starting at $2000
per month
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Free Trial
NoYes
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Considered Both Products
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, …
CloudBees Codeship
Chose CloudBees Codeship
Codeship is easier to use than Jenkins because it does not require you to set up your own server, and it provides a large amount of out-of-the-box integrations for version control systems and cloud environments. AWS CodePipeline is native to AWS and cannot deploy applications …
Chose CloudBees Codeship
Codeship has been easier for our devops team to work with as far as making delivery plans and build scripts. Anecdotally, it has been more stable over time, cutting down on time investigating why some random part of the delivery process has broken. I am not sure why this is, …
Chose CloudBees Codeship
We have been using Codeship for a few years, and what we like is that it's very clear what is built and when. We usually only have one-liners for any configuration option (build, test, deploy) and this way all changes to the build are managed in the version control system and …
Chose CloudBees Codeship
Our company uses Jenkins for all internal deployment processes for one very important reason - it's hosted internally. But Codeship is great for personal use - it has intuitive UI, easy setup and tons of integrations.
Chose CloudBees Codeship
Back in those days, we didn't know about Gitlab, and Bitbucket didn't provide a CI pipeline. Jenkins is just too much for the simple tasks we wanted to achieve, besides, we didn't have a dedicated server for the sole purpose of having our code pipelined though continuous …
Best Alternatives
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Small Businesses
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
7.8
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
6.9
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
CircleCICloudBees Codeship
Likelihood to Recommend
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
Codeship is very well suited to teams that have specialized devops members along with other specialized developers. It lets the other developers focus on what they do best, without having to learn another technology stack. This has cut down on a lot of headaches at our company with developers needing to deploy code to various different hosting services across different content management systems. The experience to push code is essentially the same for a developer no matter what the underlying technology is
Read full review
Pros
  • 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
  • Easy and fast deployment
  • A lot of tool integrations (Slack, GitHub, Bitbucket, GitLab)
  • Getting tests to run is fast and easy
Read full review
Cons
  • 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
  • UX: The overall UX is not bad, but it still needs a lot of improvement.
  • It took me quite a while to realize that in order to switch projects I needed to press my current project name so a dropdown would appear.
  • Integration with bitbucket is somewhat hidden from the users's hands. Got to make some improvements there.
Read full review
Usability
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
No answers on this topic
Performance
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
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
No answers on this topic
Alternatives Considered
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
Codeship is easier to use than Jenkins because it does not require you to set up your own server, and it provides a large amount of out-of-the-box integrations for version control systems and cloud environments. AWS CodePipeline is native to AWS and cannot deploy applications reliably to other cloud environments such as GCP or Azure.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • 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
  • We have a few small projects with different developers and Codeship shows everyone clearly, if something work, or if it doesn't.
  • In one small project with a team of three developers, we have configured two builds and it takes 2-5 minutes for everyone on the team to push changes to an infrastructure handling a little over 3M users.
Read full review
ScreenShots

CloudBees Codeship Screenshots

Screenshot of Get an overview of all your builds, identify failed builds easily and take action right from the dashboard.Screenshot of Information for a single build, inspect log files for each step and notice at a glance which pipeline and step are failing.Screenshot of Simply enter your setup and test commands, or choose from templates available for a wide range of stacks.Screenshot of Deploy to various web services without having to worry about the process. Simply choose your deployment target, which branch you want to deploy and off you go.Screenshot of We take care of all the complicated parts of the deployment. You simply fill in the blanks and you're all set.Screenshot of Get notifications for your builds on a multitude of services. You can also ping your own services to implement custom logic.