# Practical Comparison Between the CI/CD Platforms Azure DevOps and GitHub
## 2 Materials and Methods
This comparison evaluates how well each platform integrates with essential development and operations tools, including Terraform for infrastructure as code, Kubernetes for container orchestration, and security tools for vulnerability scanning and compliance enforcement [6; 7; 8]. Security and compliance form another critical dimension of this study. As software supply chain attacks and security vulnerabilities become more prevalent, CI/CD platforms must implement robust security mechanisms to ensure the integrity, confidentiality, and reliability of software releases. Azure DevOps offers built-in security features, including Azure Policy enforcement, role-based access control (RBAC), and integration with Microsoft Defender for DevOps, providing enterprise-grade security controls. GitHub Advanced Security suite includes features such as code scanning, dependency vulnerability detection, and secret scanning aimed at proactively identifying security risks within repositories. Additionally, the evaluation considers compliance with industry standards, including ISO 27001 [9], SOC 2 [10], GDPR [11], HIPAA [12], and FedRAMP [13], to determine which platform is better suited for regulated industries requiring strict security controls. Scalability and performance are examined to assess how well each platform supports large-scale development teams, multi-repository architectures, and complex deployment scenarios. Azure DevOps, designed primarily for enterprise DevOps workflows, provides a highly scalable infrastructure that accommodates distributed teams and geographically dispersed development operations. Its ability to handle large monolithic repositories, microservices architectures, and hybrid cloud deployments is key to its appeal to enterprise customers. GitHub's decentralized and developer-friendly approach is optimized for agile teams working on smaller, fast-paced projects. It has also introduced Enterprise Cloud and Enterprise Server offerings to support larger organizations. This study evaluates pipeline execution times, artifact storage efficiency, and performance bottlenecks that could impact CI/CD reliability and speed [14; 15]. Cost is another essential factor in decision-making, as organizations must balance capabilities with budget constraints. The pricing models of Azure DevOps and GitHub differ in structure, with Azure DevOps following a per-user, per-service pricing approach and GitHub adopting a tiered subscription model with free options for open-source projects. While Azure DevOps offers pay-as-you-go pricing for CI/CD execution, GitHub provides a certain number of free minutes for workflow execution with GitHub Actions, with additional costs incurred for private repositories and increased execution limits. This comparison evaluates the total cost of ownership (TCO), licensing flexibility, and potential hidden costs associated with scaling CI/CD workloads. User experience and ease of use are also considered, particularly in interface design, developer onboarding, and workflow efficiency. With its feature-rich but complex interface, Azure DevOps has a steeper learning curve, particularly for teams new to Microsoft DevOps tools. The GitHub native interface offers a more streamlined user experience, particularly for developers already accustomed to Git workflows and open-source collaboration. This study evaluates the ease with which new users can adopt and configure CI/CD pipelines, the level of documentation and community support available, and the overall efficiency of workflow management on each platform. By evaluating Azure DevOps and GitHub across these dimensions, this study aims to provide a comprehensive comparison that considers the technical, operational, and financial factors organizations must consider when selecting a CI/CD platform. The goal is to identify which platform excels in specific areas and which aligns best with different organizational needs and development strategies.