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

JFrog Container Registry vs Red Hat Quay comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on May 21, 2025

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

JFrog Container Registry
Ranking in Container Registry
1st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Red Hat Quay
Ranking in Container Registry
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Container Registry category, the mindshare of JFrog Container Registry is 29.7%, up from 29.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat Quay is 8.0%, down from 8.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Registry Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
JFrog Container Registry29.7%
Red Hat Quay8.0%
Other62.3%
Container Registry
 

Featured Reviews

Sai Balaji Bonagiri - PeerSpot reviewer
Self-hosted and works well in hybrid SaaS environments and automation is fast without any breakdowns
In my experience, there was a bit of a learning curve at the beginning. It can be somewhat challenging to install and get started. However, once you gain some experience, working with JFrog becomes much easier. Overall, it's manageable for beginners, but there might be a bit of a learning curve. I'd call myself an intermediate user.
Marieswaran M - PeerSpot reviewer
Has allowed me to build and deploy containerized applications consistently by integrating automated image updates and CI/CD workflows
The features of Red Hat Quay that I have found most valuable include the ability to switch between the previous version and the newer version; this is an extra feature currently added, and I appreciate this feature. Red Hat Quay's automated image building has helped my CI/CD pipeline efficiency by allowing me to store my source code from GitHub and GitLab to my images. It's very convenient, and it automatically stores my images to deploy in the OpenShift application, making it easier to deploy and run the application without any troubleshooting. The positive impacts I have seen from using Red Hat Quay include the ability to change to a newer version and roll back to the older version. This is the only feature I find beneficial, and I can monitor how many people download my images, which I can verify with the analytics provided. The value of geo-replication in maintaining consistent access to container images is significant since I store data in MongoDB and use the Apache Web Server application running in Quay.io, where I store my images.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It supports multi-cloud deployments across AWS, Azure, and GCP."
"We use the solution to compile the codes before publishing them. We utilize third-party containers and codes, downloading them to the JFrog Container Registry. Developers then access it from the JFrog Container Registry, and there's a specific job responsible for running and validating all security checks, ensuring compatibility. If there are any issues or if packages require updates, we manage those updates through this system."
"We have integrated JFrog Xray, and we use it for storage purposes."
"It was a good experience with JFrog Container Registry."
"Red Hat Quay's automated image building has helped my CI/CD pipeline efficiency by allowing me to store my source code from GitHub and GitLab to my images, making it easier to deploy and run the application without any troubleshooting."
"It's easy to use, and it does what it is meant for."
"Things like downloading an image, pulling an image, tagging, and pushing it back to the needed organization are fairly easy compared to doing things through the command-line interface."
 

Cons

"In my experience, there was a bit of a learning curve at the beginning. It can be somewhat challenging to install and get started."
"One challenge we face is related to performance. Our integration involves GitHab and JFrog Container Registry, with pipelines fetching data from GitHub and JFrog Container Registry for third-party code. However, there are instances where this process can slow down the pipeline."
"The solution's documentation available over the internet is not straightforward and customer-friendly."
"Pricing, purge of data or historical data, ease of usage, pricing model, setting the current pricing, changes in the configuration so that the pricing can be brought down, and better utilization of JFrog Container Registry are the issues I face."
"It could be more integrated with other platforms."
"I think Red Hat Quay could improve the security, as users can download the images without a login."
"Nothing is happening regarding AI. I don’t see the role of AI currently."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"The pricing is somewhat expensive compared to its competitors. We use the Pro version."
"JFrog Container Registry is a very expensive solution."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Registry solutions are best for your needs.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Comms Service Provider
5%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
8%
Computer Software Company
8%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about JFrog Container Registry?
It supports multi-cloud deployments across AWS, Azure, and GCP.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for JFrog Container Registry?
JFrog pricing includes self-hosted and cloud options, with costs based on licenses, subscriptions, number of nodes, and repository limits. Licensing costs are $3 per year, which I feel is reasonable.
What needs improvement with JFrog Container Registry?
Pricing, purge of data or historical data, ease of usage, pricing model, setting the current pricing, changes in the configuration so that the pricing can be brought down, and better utilization of...
What needs improvement with Red Hat Quay?
I think Red Hat Quay could improve the security, as users can download the images without a login. This is the only problem, so we need to enhance the security.
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Quay?
I am an end-user of Red Hat Quay, having just used it for one more year, and I haven't found any issues. I use this to store my images to share with my colleagues, and I store multiple applications...
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Quay?
I have not used the image vulnerability scanning feature of Red Hat Quay yet; I'm going to learn about this. Regarding geo-replication in maintaining consistent access to container images, I have f...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Facebook, Airbus, Dell, Slack, Volvo, Netflix, Spotify, T-Systems, Mastercard
The Asiakastieto Group, Akbank, TTTECH
Find out what your peers are saying about JFrog Container Registry vs. Red Hat Quay and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,883 professionals have used our research since 2012.