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

Red Hat OpenShift vs Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 15, 2024

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

Red Hat OpenShift
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
3rd
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
62
Ranking in other categories
Server Virtualization Software (10th), Container Management (11th), Hybrid Cloud Computing Platforms (6th), Agile and DevOps Services (1st)
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud
Ranking in PaaS Clouds
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the PaaS Clouds category, the mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift is 11.6%, down from 11.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud is 0.6%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
PaaS Clouds Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Red Hat OpenShift11.6%
Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud0.6%
Other87.8%
PaaS Clouds
 

Featured Reviews

Pratul Shukla - PeerSpot reviewer
Adopting a flexible and efficient approach with noticeable improvements in operational costs and continued challenges in job management
Currently, one of the biggest challenges we face is with services and jobs. For spawning batches, although it has crons, it is not easy to integrate with enterprise systems such as Autosys. The entire company uses Autosys, but we are not able to integrate it effectively. We need intermediate servers to run OC utility commands and initiate the cron job. We have to do a lot of modifications to ensure our batches work properly. With physical or virtual servers, even in AWS, we are able to write and manage multiple jobs. Managing batches in Red Hat OpenShift has been a significant challenge. Integrating third parties is a challenge with Red Hat OpenShift. For example, with Elasticsearch, onboarding itself was difficult, running file beats and dealing with routing issues. It is not straightforward, especially since we have some components in AWS as. AWS has many capabilities that come out of the box and are easier to work with compared to Red Hat OpenShift. Red Hat OpenShift's biggest disadvantage is they do not provide any private cloud setup where we can host on our site using their services. The main reason we went with Red Hat OpenShift was because it is a private cloud, and we have regulatory requirements that prevent us from using public cloud.
Adrian Bilauca - PeerSpot reviewer
Handles security setups independently for a more secure environment
OpenShift does have more secure features. Azure also has equivalent services. For my client, it was good enough to switch to Azure. For development, there wasn't any significant change in effort, however, for the DevOps team, it was a relief since Azure has managed services. We used elasticity and scalability all over.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The initial setup is simple, and OpenShift is open-source, so it's easy to install on any cloud platform."
"Red Hat OpenShift helped us with managing scaling up and scaling down."
"Its security is most valuable. It's by default secure, which is very important."
"Security is also an important part of this solution. By default, things are running with limited privileges and securely confined to their own resources. This way, different users and projects can all use the same infrastructure."
"It's cloud agnostic and the containerization and security features are outstanding."
"We are currently dealing with both local support and Red Hat support, and they have been amazing."
"The most valuable feature of OpenShift is the containers."
"The security is good."
"The initial setup is easy."
"I've used the elasticity and scalability all over."
"For the DevOps team, it was a relief since Azure has managed services."
"The deployment mechanism has become more dynamic with the use of the product."
"In general, customers appreciate its ability to run different workloads, manage applications through CI/CD pipelines like Jenkins, and leverage tools like Helm charts and Kako."
"The solution offers the most robust Kubernetes orchestration available."
"The portability, moving from one platform to another, is easy."
"Our pipeline integrates various monitoring tools like Fortify for security checks. Once the pipeline processes the code, the finished product is deployed on Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud. We ensure application setup and recovery by utilizing two separate clusters on OpenShift."
 

Cons

"Credential not hidden, so people on the same group can view it."
"OpenShift requires a very expensive and complex infrastructure. These demands can deter people from learning OpenShift."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"It would be great if it supported Bitbucket repositories too."
"I want easier node management and more user-friendly scripts for installing master and worker nodes."
"Its virtual upgrades are time-consuming."
"I had to frequently upgrade my cluster due to OpenShift's rolling updates every six months, which I found to be excessive."
"They could work on the pricing model, making it more flexible and possibly lower."
"Technical support could be a bit better."
"There is more work and effort needed for when many of the managed services are not accessible, especially in the security area. You have to do your own security setups as opposed to using a managed firewall."
"The service mesh integrations could improve the solution."
"There is room for improvement in cluster-based queue monitoring and autoscaling."
"The effectiveness is satisfactory, and there haven't been any additional fees due to meeting demands. However, there's room for improvement in pricing, performance, and stability. Regarding the UI, it could be more user-friendly and integrated with various platforms. Currently, the UI lacks user-friendliness, especially for developers unfamiliar with container technology. Expecting them to create YAML files for security purposes is unrealistic without proper guidance or experience. This aspect needs improvement."
"Making it even more cost-effective could be explored."
"The general purpose solution tries to cater to too many customers so it is heavy."
"The installation and configuration procedure should be simplified."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing of OpenShift depends on the number of nodes and who is hosting it."
"We had a Red Hat Enterprise Linux (RHEL) license for all our servers' operating systems. By having multiple Red Hat products together, you can negotiate costs and leverage on having a sort of enterprise license agreement to reduce the overall outlay or TCO."
"It's important to start small because the solution is scalable. We can build our cluster and look at the bundle option, not the external subscriptions. Talking to the people at Red Hat can save us money."
"The product’s pricing is expensive."
"The cost is quite high."
"The product has reasonable pricing."
"It's expensive. It may be cheaper to invest in building Vanilla Kubernetes, especially if security is not the number one motivation or requirement. Of course, that's difficult, and in some business areas, such as banking, that's not something you can put as a second priority. In other situations, a Vanilla Kubernetes with a sufficiently strong team can be cheaper and almost as effective."
"The solution is cost-effective."
"This product is not costly when compared to other vendors."
"The pricing is a little high in China."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which PaaS Clouds solutions are best for your needs.
869,832 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Government
7%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business17
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise40
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

How does OpenShift compare with Amazon AWS?
Open Shift makes managing infrastructure easy because of self-healing and automatic scaling. There is also a wonderful dashboard mechanism to alert us in case the application is over-committing or ...
Which would you recommend - Pivotal Cloud Foundry or OpenShift?
Pivotal Cloud Foundry is a cloud-native application platform to simplify app delivery. It is efficient and effective. The best feature is how easy it is to handle external services such as database...
What do you like most about OpenShift?
OpenShift facilitates DevOps practices and improves CI/CD workflows in terms of stability compared to Jenkins.
What do you like most about Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
Our pipeline integrates various monitoring tools like Fortify for security checks. Once the pipeline processes the code, the finished product is deployed on Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud. We ensu...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
From a cost perspective, some cost-effective situations were more difficult to achieve in Azure than in OpenShift. Comparing them can be difficult since the financial services cloud had stripped ma...
What needs improvement with Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud?
There is more work and effort needed for when many of the managed services are not accessible, especially in the security area. You have to do your own security setups as opposed to using a managed...
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

UPS, Cathay Pacific, Hilton
edenor, Ford
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat OpenShift vs. Red Hat OpenShift on IBM Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
869,832 professionals have used our research since 2012.