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

Top 10 Harness Alternatives

Vendor: Harness
3.9 out of 5
Badge Leader
Leave a review

Top Harness Competitors

Discover the top alternatives and competitors to Harness based on the interviews we conducted with its users. The top alternative solutions include SonarQube, GitLab, and IBM Turbonomic. The alternatives are sorted based on how often peers compare the solutions.

Harness surpasses its competitors by offering cutting-edge continuous delivery solutions, advanced AI-driven efficiency, and seamless integrations, enabling development teams to automate complex processes, speed up deployments, and elevate software delivery performance.

Harness Alternatives Report

Learn what solutions real users are comparing with Harness, and compare use cases, valuable features, and pricing.
Get the alternatives report
Harness Logo
SonarQube
4.0 out of 5
Harness Logo
SonarQube
4.0 out of 5
SonarQube focuses on code quality analysis with strengths in static code analysis and vulnerability detection. In comparison, Harness offers automated deployments and advanced CI/CD features. A tech buyer may choose SonarQube for code integrity and Harness for deployment efficiency.
Download Harness vs. SonarQube Report
SonarQube typically involves a substantial initial investment whereas Harness offers a more budget-friendly setup, highlighting a significant cost difference between the two solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
SonarQube typically involves a substantial initial investment whereas Harness offers a more budget-friendly setup, highlighting a significant cost difference between the two solutions.
Harness Logo
GitLab
4.2 out of 5
Harness Logo
GitLab
4.2 out of 5
GitLab offers integrated DevOps tools optimizing the software lifecycle and cost-effectiveness. In comparison, Harness specializes in Continuous Delivery, emphasizing automation for efficient deployment, justifying its higher investment with significant time and operational savings; both appeal to different tech buyer priorities.
Download GitLab vs. Harness Report
GitLab offers competitive setup costs, providing comprehensive features for a lower initial investment, while Harness presents a higher setup cost justified by its advanced functionalities.
View comparison
Pricing
GitLab offers competitive setup costs, providing comprehensive features for a lower initial investment, while Harness presents a higher setup cost justified by its advanced functionalities.
Harness Logo
IBM Turbonomic
4.4 out of 5
Harness Logo
IBM Turbonomic
4.4 out of 5
IBM Turbonomic is favored for its cost-efficiency and automation, benefiting enterprises focused on performance optimization. In comparison, Harness excels in continuous delivery and integration, appealing to teams seeking advanced functionality. IBM offers comprehensive support, while Harness provides rapid deployment for fast-paced environments.
Download Harness vs. IBM Turbonomic Report
IBM Turbonomic offers a straightforward setup process, while Harness provides a structured approach with detailed guidelines, highlighting its comprehensive nature compared to IBM's more streamlined initial configuration.
Watch a demo
View comparison
Pricing
IBM Turbonomic offers a straightforward setup process, while Harness provides a structured approach with detailed guidelines, highlighting its comprehensive nature compared to IBM's more streamlined initial configuration.
Harness Logo
Tekton
3.9 out of 5
Harness Logo
Tekton
3.9 out of 5
Harness provides an advantage in pricing and customer support, making it ideal for those prioritizing simplicity and ease of deployment. In comparison, Tekton offers robust features and high flexibility, appealing to users needing extensive functionality and customization in Kubernetes-native environments.
Download Harness vs. Tekton Report
Harness has a higher setup cost compared to Tekton, which is known for its cost-efficiency. While Harness offers extensive features that might justify its price, Tekton provides an affordable alternative with fundamental capabilities.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness has a higher setup cost compared to Tekton, which is known for its cost-efficiency. While Harness offers extensive features that might justify its price, Tekton provides an affordable alternative with fundamental capabilities.
Harness Logo
GitHub Actions
4.2 out of 5
Harness Logo
GitHub Actions
4.2 out of 5
Harness offers advanced governance for enterprises prioritizing compliance, featuring intelligent CD with automatic rollbacks. In comparison, GitHub Actions integrates seamlessly with GitHub's ecosystem, appealing to teams through its extensive action libraries and flexible, scalable pricing for diverse projects.
Download GitHub Actions vs. Harness Report
Harness setup costs are straightforward with clear pricing, while GitHub Actions offers a flexible pay-per-use model, highlighting a key difference in initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness setup costs are straightforward with clear pricing, while GitHub Actions offers a flexible pay-per-use model, highlighting a key difference in initial expenses.
Harness Logo
Jenkins
4.0 out of 5
Harness Logo
Jenkins
4.0 out of 5
Jenkins offers robust customization through its extensive plugin ecosystem, ideal for those seeking a flexible workflow. In comparison, Harness focuses on automation with its service model, attracting teams looking for quick, automatic setups. Jenkins requires effort to manage, while Harness simplifies deployment with support.
Download Harness vs. Jenkins Report
Jenkins has a lower setup cost compared to Harness, with Jenkins being more cost-effective initially, while Harness may require a higher initial investment.
View comparison
Pricing
Jenkins has a lower setup cost compared to Harness, with Jenkins being more cost-effective initially, while Harness may require a higher initial investment.
Harness Logo
TeamCity
4.1 out of 5
Harness Logo
TeamCity
4.1 out of 5
TeamCity excels in integration capabilities appealing to diverse environments. In comparison, Harness offers advanced deployment automation, ideal for complex processes. TeamCity supports flexibility, while Harness provides AI-driven automation for streamlined workflows, enhancing ease of use for intricate deployment tasks.
Download Harness vs. TeamCity Report
TeamCity offers a straightforward setup cost, while Harness presents a more flexible pricing approach, highlighting a key difference in their initial investment requirements.
View comparison
Pricing
TeamCity offers a straightforward setup cost, while Harness presents a more flexible pricing approach, highlighting a key difference in their initial investment requirements.
Harness Logo
Bamboo
3.7 out of 5
Harness Logo
Bamboo
3.7 out of 5
Bamboo excels with seamless integration with Jira, ideal for Atlassian users. In comparison, Harness, offering automated deployment and machine learning, is chosen for advanced features. Tech buyers might select Bamboo for straightforward integration or Harness for its innovative capabilities.
Download Bamboo vs. Harness Report
Bamboo's setup cost is lower, providing an economical starting point, while Harness involves a higher initial investment reflecting its advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
Bamboo's setup cost is lower, providing an economical starting point, while Harness involves a higher initial investment reflecting its advanced features.
Harness Logo
Cloudability
3.7 out of 5
Harness Logo
Cloudability
3.7 out of 5
Cloudability offers comprehensive cost management tools, appealing to those focused on budgeting and forecasting. In comparison, Harness excels in deployment automation, attracting users who prioritize efficient deployment workflows and feature depth, offering operational cost reductions and enhanced deployment efficiency.
Download Cloudability vs. Harness Report
Cloudability has minimal setup costs, enhancing quick adoption, while Harness involves more significant setup expenses, reflecting its comprehensive features.
View comparison
Pricing
Cloudability has minimal setup costs, enhancing quick adoption, while Harness involves more significant setup expenses, reflecting its comprehensive features.
Harness Logo
Harness Logo
Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360)
4.5 out of 5
Harness attracts tech buyers with its competitive pricing and efficient CI/CD capabilities. In comparison, Turbo360 appeals to those needing comprehensive monitoring and integration support, justifying its higher cost with features tailored for complex application environments.
Download Harness vs. Turbo360 (Formerly Serverless360) Report
Harness has a higher setup cost which may be justified by its advanced features, while Turbo360, formerly Serverless360, offers a more affordable initial setup, appealing to budget-conscious users seeking efficient solutions.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness has a higher setup cost which may be justified by its advanced features, while Turbo360, formerly Serverless360, offers a more affordable initial setup, appealing to budget-conscious users seeking efficient solutions.
Harness Logo
AWS CodePipeline
4.2 out of 5
Harness Logo
AWS CodePipeline
4.2 out of 5
Harness offers cost efficiency and customer support, focusing on automation and reducing manual intervention. In comparison, AWS CodePipeline provides a comprehensive feature set with extensive integration capabilities, making it suitable for enterprises heavily utilizing AWS infrastructure, prioritizing long-term ROI through seamless scalability.
Download AWS CodePipeline vs. Harness Report
Harness has a more straightforward initial setup, reducing time and effort needed for deployment, whereas AWS CodePipeline may involve higher setup costs with more complex configurations required at the outset.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness has a more straightforward initial setup, reducing time and effort needed for deployment, whereas AWS CodePipeline may involve higher setup costs with more complex configurations required at the outset.
Harness Logo
CloudBees
4.2 out of 5
Harness Logo
CloudBees
4.2 out of 5
Harness offers cost-effective pricing and strong support, focusing on automation with features like auto-deployment. In comparison, CloudBees delivers extensive integration options and rich enterprise CI features, appealing to organizations requiring robust integration and customization but willing to invest more.
Download CloudBees vs. Harness Report
Harness has streamlined setup costs, providing a straightforward entry point, whereas CloudBees involves a more complex setup with varied expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness has streamlined setup costs, providing a straightforward entry point, whereas CloudBees involves a more complex setup with varied expenses.
Harness Logo
GoCD
3.8 out of 5
Harness Logo
GoCD
3.8 out of 5
GoCD offers intuitive workflow visualization, catering to businesses valuing open-source solutions. In comparison, Harness provides advanced AI-driven features, appealing to those prioritizing time-saving processes. GoCD emphasizes cost-effectiveness, whereas Harness delivers greater ROI through operational efficiencies despite higher initial costs.
Download GoCD vs. Harness Report
GoCD has lower setup costs, offering a cost-effective solution, while Harness presents a more premium setup, reflecting its advanced features.
View comparison
Pricing
GoCD has lower setup costs, offering a cost-effective solution, while Harness presents a more premium setup, reflecting its advanced features.
Harness Logo
CircleCI
3.4 out of 5
Harness Logo
CircleCI
3.4 out of 5
CircleCI appeals to tech buyers with its favorable pricing, robust integrations, scalability, and excellent customer support. In comparison, Harness attracts those seeking advanced automation, sophisticated delivery capabilities, and long-term value, despite its higher cost and more intricate deployment model.
Download CircleCI vs. Harness Report
CircleCI has a minimal initial setup cost, making it attractive for startups, while Harness requires a higher upfront investment that might suit larger enterprises.
View comparison
Pricing
CircleCI has a minimal initial setup cost, making it attractive for startups, while Harness requires a higher upfront investment that might suit larger enterprises.
Harness Logo
Bazel
1 out of 5
Harness Logo
Bazel
1 out of 5

From startup to enterprise, choose the Bazel open source project to build and test your multi-language, multi-platform projects.

View comparison
Harness Logo
Digital.ai Release
4.2 out of 5
Harness Logo
Digital.ai Release
4.2 out of 5
Digital.ai Release excels in complex, multi-cloud environments with its advanced orchestration, appealing to those needing robust release management. In comparison, Harness offers intelligent automation and continuous verification, attracting buyers prioritizing faster deployment cycles and streamlined operational efficiency.
Download Digital.ai Release vs. Harness Report
Digital.ai Release has a higher setup cost compared to Harness, which offers a more budget-friendly option.
View comparison
Pricing
Digital.ai Release has a higher setup cost compared to Harness, which offers a more budget-friendly option.
Harness Logo
Buildkite
4.1 out of 5
Harness Logo
Buildkite
4.1 out of 5
Harness offers autonomous continuous verification and feature flags for reliable deployment. In comparison, Buildkite provides flexible pipeline setup and scalability, ideal for complex environments. Harness’s predictable pricing model appeals to those seeking quick setups, while Buildkite caters to needs requiring long-term adaptability.
Download Buildkite vs. Harness Report
Harness offers streamlined setup at lower upfront costs, while Buildkite provides a flexible installation with higher initial expenses.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness offers streamlined setup at lower upfront costs, while Buildkite provides a flexible installation with higher initial expenses.
Harness Logo
AWS CodeBuild
4.1 out of 5
Harness Logo
AWS CodeBuild
4.1 out of 5
Harness offers advanced automation and user-friendly integrations, enhancing deployment efficiency. In comparison, AWS CodeBuild integrates seamlessly with AWS services, providing a comprehensive solution. Tech buyers may choose Harness for flexible automation, while AWS CodeBuild suits those invested in the AWS ecosystem.
Download AWS CodeBuild vs. Harness Report
Harness offers a straightforward setup, while AWS CodeBuild may involve a more complex initial configuration, reflecting different user preferences in ease of installation.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness offers a straightforward setup, while AWS CodeBuild may involve a more complex initial configuration, reflecting different user preferences in ease of installation.
Harness Logo
LaunchDarkly
4.0 out of 5
Harness Logo
LaunchDarkly
4.0 out of 5
Harness is favored for its cost-effectiveness and streamlined deployment integration with robust continuous delivery features. In comparison, LaunchDarkly provides advanced feature flagging and experimentation capabilities, offering strategic advantages and flexibility despite its higher pricing.
Download Harness vs. LaunchDarkly Report
Harness involves a higher setup cost with more upfront investment compared to LaunchDarkly's more affordable setup, offering a cost-effective solution from the start.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness involves a higher setup cost with more upfront investment compared to LaunchDarkly's more affordable setup, offering a cost-effective solution from the start.
Harness Logo
JFrog Pipeline
4.0 out of 5
Harness Logo
JFrog Pipeline
4.0 out of 5
JFrog Pipelines empowers software teams to ship updates faster by automating DevOps processes in a continuously streamlined and secure way across all their teams and tools. Encompassing continuous integration (CI), continuous delivery (CD), infrastructure and more, it automates everything from code to production. Pipelines is natively integrated with the JFrog Platform and is available with both cloud (software-as-a-service) and on-prem subscriptions.
The pricing is the cheapest compared to the other platforms out there.
View comparison
Pricing
The pricing is the cheapest compared to the other platforms out there.
Harness Logo
CloudZero
3.8 out of 5
Harness Logo
CloudZero
3.8 out of 5
Harness excels in deployment automation, appealing to organizations prioritizing process efficiency. In comparison, CloudZero provides detailed cloud cost insights, ideal for businesses focusing on financial management. Harness offers extensive features for long-term ROI, while CloudZero enables immediate budget visibility for cost-conscious buyers.
Download CloudZero vs. Harness Report
Harness requires a substantial initial setup cost, while CloudZero offers a more affordable entry point.
View comparison
Pricing
Harness requires a substantial initial setup cost, while CloudZero offers a more affordable entry point.
Harness Logo
Codefresh
1 out of 5
Harness Logo
Codefresh
1 out of 5

Codefresh is a next-generation enterprise software delivery platform for cloud-native applications. We help you automate your GitOps workflows and advanced deployments such as Canary and Blue/Green and are the premium Argo enterprise solution. DevOps teams from GoodRx, Monday.com, Deloitte, and more depend on Codefresh to deploy their software in a safe and scalable manner. Codefresh can support any pipeline end-to-end.

View comparison

Related categories

Build Automation
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
Cloud Cost Management