The right replacement depends on who you want running your build infrastructure. Hosted services take the servers off your hands, self-hosted servers give you full control in exchange for upkeep, and wider delivery platforms add deployment and release management. Decide that first, then trial with one real pipeline.
If your builds are slow, your agents need babysitting or you simply want something different from Buildkite, the options split quickly by where they run and how much of the work they take on. Here are nine CI/CD and deployment tools in no particular order. The comparison comes first, so you can cross off anything that doesn't fit your stack before reading further.
Nine build and deploy tools side by side
| Tool | Kind of service | Good for |
|---|---|---|
| AppVeyor | Hosted CI/CD | Builds across Windows, Linux and macOS |
| Bitrise | Mobile CI/CD | Building, testing and shipping iOS and Android apps |
| Buddy | DevOps automation suite | DevOps and platform work with an AI copilot |
| CircleCI | Hosted CI/CD | Testing and shipping every change automatically |
| Drone | Self-service continuous delivery | Automating builds and tests for busy teams |
| GoCD | Open source build and release | Modelling release pipelines on your own servers |
| Harness | AI software delivery platform | Managing the whole delivery cycle with AI agents |
| Jenkins | Open source automation server | Self-hosted builds you control and extend |
| Octopus Deploy | Deployment automation | Releasing to cloud, hybrid and on-premises targets |
The full list, alphabetically
Ordered by name, with nothing ranked above the rest. The notes summarise how each vendor or open source project talks about itself.
AppVeyor
Best for: Teams that need builds and deployments on Windows as well as Linux and macOS, which the vendor names as its core service.
Bitrise
Best for: Mobile app teams; the vendor describes a mobile DevOps platform for building, testing and deploying apps quickly, with a free plan named.
Buddy
Best for: Small teams and agencies wanting a DevOps and platform engineering suite with an AI copilot, per the vendor, and a free plan to start on.
CircleCI
Best for: Product teams who want every change validated, tested and shipped through automated pipelines; the vendor pitches it as delivery at AI speed.
Drone
Best for: Development teams after self-service continuous delivery that automates software builds and testing, as the vendor puts it.
GoCD
Best for: Engineers who'd rather run a free, open source build and release server themselves; the project says Thoughtworks originally built it.
Harness
Best for: Larger engineering groups wanting one delivery platform across the software life cycle, which the vendor says runs on purpose-built AI agents; a free plan is named.
Jenkins
Best for: Teams happy to host and maintain their own open source automation server for building, testing and deploying software.
Octopus Deploy
Best for: Ops teams releasing to multi-cloud, hybrid and on-premises environments; the vendor focuses on the deployment side rather than building code.
Where each one runs
Hosted for you. CircleCI, AppVeyor and Bitrise run your builds on infrastructure the vendor looks after. You write the pipeline file and they handle the machines. One's built for mobile apps and another's angle is covering Windows alongside Linux and macOS, so check which matches the code you ship.
Run on your own servers. Jenkins, GoCD and Drone are the classic do-it-yourself choices. You get full control over where code is built and what tools sit on the machines, and you also get the job of upgrading, patching and scaling them.
Wider delivery platforms. Harness and Buddy go beyond running builds into the wider delivery process, with AI features front and centre on both homepages. Octopus Deploy sits at the release end: it picks up a finished build and gets it safely into each environment, so some teams pair it with a separate CI tool.
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.
Time to a first green build, and who looks after it afterwards
Buildkite markets itself to large engineering organisations running heavy AI build loads, and it says leading teams have standardised on it. A small team has a different question: how quickly can we get from sign-up to a pipeline that builds, tests and passes on our real code, and who keeps it healthy six months from now?
That second half is the one that bites. A self-hosted server can be running in an afternoon, but someone has to own its upgrades, plugins, security fixes and disk space forever. A hosted service removes that chore, but you'll live within its machine types, limits and queue times. Neither's wrong. What goes wrong is choosing without deciding who on the team owns the upkeep.
So when you compare, time two things: how long it takes to get a first green build on a real repository, and how long a typical week of maintenance would take. The second number's usually the one that decides it, and it's the one nobody puts on a homepage.
Advice for small engineering teams
If nobody on your team wants to look after build servers, you're better off starting with a hosted service and only move to self-hosting when you hit a real limit, such as special hardware, strict data rules or very long builds. If you already run your own infrastructure and have someone who enjoys owning it, an open source server gives you the most control and the fewest surprises from a vendor.
Mobile teams should look at a mobile-focused service first, because signing, simulators and app store steps aren't fun to rebuild by hand. And if your real pain is releases rather than builds, look at the deployment tools separately instead of expecting one CI service to do everything. Keep an eye on what happens after release too: my guides to CI/CD tools and status page tools cover the pieces either side of the pipeline.
Trial one pipeline before you move the rest
- Choose one real repository with tests that already pass, not a toy project.
- Rebuild its pipeline in two shortlisted tools, using each one's free plan or trial where offered.
- Note how long it takes to reach a first green build and what you had to set up by hand.
- Run both for a week of normal commits and log failures, slow queues and anything flaky.
- Write down who'll own upkeep for each option, then move the rest of your pipelines only once one tool wins on both speed and effort.
Do you make CI/CD or developer tools? Tool makers can ask to be considered for a featured place on this list.
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 difference between CI and CD?
Continuous integration builds and tests every change automatically. Continuous delivery or deployment takes the tested build and releases it to an environment, sometimes all the way to production.
Should a small team host its own CI server?
Only if someone wants to own it. Self-hosting gives you control, but upgrades, plugins and security fixes become your job. Hosted services remove that work.
Will my existing build machines work with a new CI tool?
Sometimes. Several tools can run builds on machines you control, so check whether your shortlist supports your own runners before you rebuild anything.
Is moving pipelines a big job?
A plain build and test pipeline is quick to rebuild; one full of custom scripts and plugins takes far longer. Port one first and use it as the pattern for the rest.
Do I need a separate deployment tool?
Not always. Many CI tools deploy too. A dedicated deployment tool helps when you release to several environments or need careful approvals and rollbacks.
Is open source CI safe to run?
It can be, if it's kept up to date. Patch the server and its plugins regularly, limit who can change pipelines and keep secrets out of build logs.
