GitHub alternatives: 8 version control tools compared
Teams seek a GitHub alternative when they want to run the code host on their own servers without buying the Enterprise plan, when open source matters, or when they want pipelines, security scanning and planning in one product. They move to GitLab for breadth, to Gitea or Forgejo for a light server, or to a suite they already pay for.
Pricing: Free plan with unlimited public and private repositories; Team $4 and Enterprise from $21 per user per month for the first twelve months, published
Established in: United States
01
Why buyers look past GitHub
01
Self-hosting sits on the top plan
GitHub is the market leader, but its platform is not open source, and its self-hosted product, Enterprise Server, is listed under the Enterprise plan at $21 per user per month for the first twelve months. Organisations that must keep source code on their own infrastructure on a smaller budget, or that want to read the platform's code, end up looking at GitLab, Gitea or Forgejo.
02
The platform is assembled from an ecosystem
GitHub's strength is the Marketplace of Actions and integrations. The other side of that is a toolchain put together from many parts, each with its own settings. Teams wanting repositories, CI/CD, a container registry, security scanning and planning under one permission model find that design in GitLab.
03
The rest of the company runs another suite
An organisation already paying for Jira and Confluence, or built on Azure and .NET, has a code host available inside that suite with issue linking or boards already attached. For those teams the question is whether GitHub's ecosystem justifies keeping code outside it and maintaining the connection.
Free and open source to self-host; self-hosted Enterprise shown at $9.50 per user per month (list $19) on a one-year commitment, published; Gitea Cloud priced separately
#6
you want self-hosting with the least operational weight
Pay-what-you-can from about €4, €8 or €12 a month during public alpha
#10
your contributors already prefer an email patch workflow
03
What each one does differently
1
GitLab
United States · Free tier, capped at 5 users per private group on GitLab.com; Premium $29 per user per month billed annually, published; Ultimate custom priced
GitLab puts CI/CD, a container registry, security scanning and issue planning in one product under one permission model, and every tier, including Free, can be self-managed. Premium is $29 per user per month, billed annually, and Ultimate is custom-priced, above GitHub's $4 Team and $21 Enterprise.
Switch from GitHub if you want one platform that you can also run yourself.
Not disclosed by the vendor · Free and open source to self-host; self-hosted Enterprise shown at $9.50 per user per month (list $19) on a one-year commitment, published; Gitea Cloud priced separately
Gitea is a light server that you host, with 2 CPU cores and 1 GB of RAM typically enough for a small team. Its Actions are built for GitHub Actions compatibility, with documented exceptions, so automation mostly carries over. The company behind it discloses no place of business.
Switch from GitHub if you want self-hosting with the least operational weight.
Germany · Free and open source under GPL v3 or later; no paid edition
Forgejo is a hard fork of Gitea, governed by its contributors and backed by the non-profit Codeberg e.V., the opposite of GitHub's commercial model. It is free software under GPL v3 or later with no paid edition. Its Actions are familiar to GitHub users but not designed to be compatible.
Switch from GitHub if community governance of the code host matters to you.
Australia · Free up to 5 users; Standard $3.65 per user per month; Premium $7.25 per user per month, published
Bitbucket sits inside the Atlassian suite, tying code to Jira work items, with pipelines built in. It is free up to 5 users and $3.65 per user per month on Standard. Its pull request interface and marketplace are thinner than GitHub's, and its free plan has 50 build minutes against GitHub's 2,000.
Switch from GitHub if your team already lives in Jira and Confluence.
United States · Basic plan $6 per user per month after 5 free users; Basic + Test Plans $52 per user per month, published
Azure DevOps bundles repos with boards, pipelines, test plans and artifact feeds, free for the first five users and $6 per user after. It suits Azure and .NET teams; elsewhere the tooling feels bolted on and the interface more cluttered than GitHub's.
Switch from GitHub if you are a Microsoft shop wanting boards and test plans alongside code.
Codeberg is run by a registered German non-profit and costs nothing at any size, with git hosting, issues, a package registry and CI. It accepts only free and open source projects, so it replaces GitHub's public side and nothing proprietary.
Switch from GitHub if you maintain open source projects and prefer a non-profit host.
Denmark · Free for up to 5 full members; Team plan €15 per month for up to 10 full members, published, excl. VAT
Gitoro is a Danish hosted service with GitLab-compatible pipeline syntax, free read-only collaborators and service accounts so AI coding agents follow the same branch protection as people. It is a young vendor, SaaS only, and nowhere near GitHub's ecosystem in size.
Switch from GitHub if you are a small team that wants a fixed monthly plan and agents under branch rules.
Netherlands · Pay-what-you-can from about €4, €8 or €12 a month during public alpha
SourceHut discards the pull request that GitHub's workflow is built on: patches are sent by email and reviewed on a mailing list. Pricing is pay-what-you-can. It is in public alpha, with no SSO and no audit log, and retraining is a real cost.
Switch from GitHub if your contributors already prefer an email patch workflow.
GitHub is the right place to remain when the ecosystem is what you use: the largest catalogue of Actions and integrations, and developers who arrive already holding an account. The free plan includes unlimited public and private repositories and 2,000 Actions minutes a month, and Team is listed at $4 per user per month. If nothing requires low-cost self-hosting or open source, the alternatives mostly add migration work.
05
What moving off GitHub involves
01
Repositories move easily, workflows do not
Git history copies to any Git host, and GitLab's importer also brings issues, pull requests, reviews and wiki pages. The automation is another matter: every GitHub Actions workflow becomes a GitLab CI pipeline written from scratch. Gitea is the exception, since its Actions aim at GitHub Actions compatibility; Forgejo expects minor adjustments.
02
Count what you took from the Marketplace
Each Action and integration added over the years is a dependency on GitHub. List them per repository before picking a destination, then check which have an equivalent there. Smaller hosts such as Bitbucket and Beanstalk have thinner ecosystems, so some steps will need scripting.
03
Contributors have to follow you
Developers generally already have a GitHub account, which is part of why it is the default. On another host, contributors and new hires need accounts and, on something like SourceHut, a different review habit. For public projects, weigh what leaving does to casual contributions.
06
Questions about replacing GitHub
5 answers
What is the best self-hosted alternative to GitHub?
GitLab if you want the whole platform, with pipelines, registry and security scanning; its documentation sets 8 vCPU and 16 GB of memory as the baseline.
Gitea or Forgejo if you want a light server: Gitea's documentation calls 2 CPU cores and 1 GB of RAM enough for a small team.
Is GitLab better than GitHub?
GitLab covers more in one product and can be self-managed on any tier, which is why it ranks above GitHub on this site.
GitHub has the larger ecosystem, lower published per-user prices and a free plan without GitLab.com's five-user cap on private groups. Moving means rewriting every Actions workflow as GitLab CI.
Can I keep my GitHub Actions workflows if I switch?
Mostly, if you move to Gitea, which builds its Actions for GitHub Actions compatibility and documents the gaps. Forgejo says its Actions are familiar but not designed to be compatible, so expect minor tweaks. On GitLab the pipelines are rewritten, and Gitoro uses GitLab-compatible syntax.
Is there a free alternative to GitHub for open source projects?
Codeberg, which is free at any size and run by a German non-profit association, and accepts only projects under a free and open source licence. For private code, Bitbucket and GitLab.com are each free up to 5 users, and Azure DevOps includes 5 free users.
Does GitHub have a self-hosted version?
Yes, GitHub Enterprise Server, which the pricing page lists as part of the Enterprise plan at $21 per user per month for the first twelve months.
Teams that want to self-host for less usually choose GitLab Self-Managed on the Free tier, or the open source editions of Gitea and Forgejo.
—
Sources
Checked 30 September 2026
GitHub pricing page: GitHub plan prices, free plan allowances and Enterprise Server being part of the Enterprise plan.
GitLab pricing page: GitLab Premium price, custom-priced Ultimate, Free tier limits, scanning per tier and self-managed availability.
