First decide whether you want to leave the GitHub Actions workflow format or only its runners. If builds are slow but your workflows are fine, a faster drop-in runner is the smaller change. If you need a different CI model, mobile pipelines or self-hosted agents, move to another CI/CD platform. Ten options follow in no particular order.
A big share of this market isn't trying to replace GitHub Actions at all. Several names here only replace the machines your workflows run on, and one says you switch with a one-line change to your workflow file.
The ten tools below are listed alphabetically, and every description comes from each vendor's own website, read as of Oct 2026. If you're still checking what GitHub itself includes, my guide to whether GitHub is free covers that first.
GitHub Actions alternatives side by side
I checked the free plan column on each vendor's own website, as of Oct 2026. Yes means the page names a free plan, a free version or an open source edition. Trial only means it names a time-limited free trial. Not stated means the page I read named neither, so check the vendor's own site before you sign up.
| Tool | Type | Good for | Free plan |
|---|---|---|---|
| Bitrise | Mobile DevOps platform | iOS and Android builds, tests and releases | Not stated |
| Blacksmith | Faster GitHub Actions runners | Running existing workflows on faster hardware | Not stated |
| Buildkite | CI/CD platform | Custom pipelines with hosted or self-hosted agents | Not stated |
| CircleCI | CI/CD platform | Validating code changes before and after push | Not stated |
| Dagger | Programmable CI engine | CI as code that runs the same way everywhere | Yes |
| Depot | Software delivery infrastructure | Fast image builds, runners, caches and registries | Not stated |
| GitLab CI/CD | CI/CD inside a DevSecOps platform | Build, test and deploy with governance built in | Trial only |
| Harness CI | AI-assisted continuous integration | Building and testing AI-written code at scale | Not stated |
| Semaphore | CI/CD platform, cloud or self-hosted | Pipelines with monorepo support and test reports | Yes |
| WarpBuild | Drop-in GitHub Actions runners | Faster runners with a one-line workflow change | Not stated |
Ten CI/CD platforms and faster runners
Bitrise
Best for: Mobile teams shipping iOS and Android apps who want CI, build caching, release management and React Native updates on one platform.
Blacksmith
Best for: Anyone happy with their workflows but not their build times, who wants jobs run on bare-metal gaming CPUs with faster cache downloads.
Buildkite
Best for: Engineering teams moving off Jenkins who want custom CI/CD pipelines, self-hosted or hosted Mac and Linux agents, and a test engine that removes flaky tests.
CircleCI
Best for: Teams that want a dedicated CI platform with autoscaling, build optimisation and a choice of execution environments, plus a CLI to validate changes before you push.
Dagger
Best for: Developers who want CI written as code that runs the same way locally and in the cloud, built for the speed of coding agents, on an open source engine.
Depot
Best for: Container-heavy teams wanting faster image builds and Actions runners, plus a programmable CI engine and registries, all on one vendor's infrastructure.
GitLab CI/CD
Best for: Organisations that want source control, CI/CD, security testing and governance on one platform, so pipelines move fast without losing control.
Harness CI
Best for: Larger engineering groups that want AI-assisted continuous integration as part of a wider delivery platform covering deployments, infrastructure and code review.
Semaphore
Best for: Groups that want hosted, hybrid or open source self-hosted CI/CD, with monorepo support, test reports and self-hosted agents.
WarpBuild
Best for: Teams that want faster runners with optimised caching and incremental builds, switched on with a one-line workflow change and no migration.
Leave the workflow format or just the runner?
Here's what most comparisons miss. Part of this market is betting that you'll keep your Actions workflows:
Want AI doing the heavy lifting in your marketing?
I build the systems that handle the boring 80 percent, so you get your week back. Done properly, with the human kept in.
- Blacksmith's page title is 'The Fastest Way to Run GitHub Actions', and the same page announces a Series C round led by Sequoia. That's a lot of investor confidence in people staying on Actions.
- WarpBuild and Depot both sell faster runners for existing workflows, so you can try them without rewriting a single pipeline.
- Dagger's page now reads 'CI that keeps up' and announces a 1.0 beta. It calls itself third-generation CI, after Jenkins and GitHub Actions.
So start with the pain. Slow builds point to a runner. A workflow format that fights you points to a new platform.
When a different CI platform makes sense
- Mobile apps. A mobile DevOps platform gives you iOS and Android pipelines, build caching and release management that a general CI tool leaves you to assemble.
- Self-hosted or hybrid builds. Several platforms here offer self-hosted agents or a self-hosted edition for code that can't leave your network.
- One platform for everything. If you'd rather have source control, CI and security testing in one place, a DevSecOps platform covers more than CI.
- CI as code. A programmable engine lets you run the same pipeline on a laptop and in CI, which makes a failed build far easier to debug.
Whichever pipeline you pick, the editor side matters too, and VS Code extensions for everyday work compares the extensions most setups settle on.
Five questions before a CI migration
- Is the problem speed, flexibility or control? Each points to a different kind of tool.
- Do your builds need macOS or special hardware? Check which hosted machines are on offer.
- Can code leave your network? If not, shortlist tools with self-hosted agents.
- How much YAML will you rewrite? A runner swap needs one line; a platform move touches every workflow.
- Who supports it when a release breaks at night? Managed CI and open source engines carry very different support models.
Faster builds are only half the job. If you also want dependency and code scanning in the pipeline, my guide to Snyk alternatives covers the security side.
Do you make a CI/CD tool or runner service? Tool makers can ask to be considered for a featured place on this list.
My plain advice on replacing GitHub Actions
Try a faster runner first. It's the smallest change you can make, and if builds get quick enough you've saved yourself a migration. Move to another platform only when the workflow format itself is the problem, such as mobile pipelines, self-hosted builds or a pipeline you want to run locally. When you do move, migrate one repository end to end before you touch the rest.
And if AI coding tools are the reason your pull request volume has jumped, my roundup of AI coding assistants is worth a look alongside this.
Want your tool on this list? Featured spots and reviews here are paid partnerships. Here's how to partner with me.
Frequently asked questions
What's the quickest way to speed up GitHub Actions?
Swap the runners rather than the platform. Several tools here run your existing workflows on faster machines, and one says the switch is a one-line change to your workflow file.
Is there an open source alternative to GitHub Actions?
Yes. One CI engine on this list is open source and runs on your own machine or server, and one CI/CD platform offers an open source, self-hosted edition.
Is there a CI/CD alternative built for mobile apps?
Yes. One platform here is a mobile DevOps platform for iOS and Android, with build caching, release management and a way to ship React Native updates quickly.
Can I keep my workflows and still switch?
Yes, if you only change the runners. The drop-in runner services here keep your workflow files and change where the jobs run.
Do GitHub Actions alternatives work with GitHub repositories?
Most do. The CI/CD platforms here list GitHub integrations, and the runner services exist to run GitHub Actions jobs.
