Dev & Engineering · Engineering, IT & AI
Should you build or buy CI/CD?
CI/CD software automates the process of building, testing, and deploying code changes — running test suites every time code is pushed, packaging artifacts, and pushing releases through staging to production so teams can ship faster with fewer manual steps.
The build-vs-buy decision for CI/CD turns on how much your pipeline logic differs from what hosted platforms provide and how far the economics of self-hosted runners have shifted relative to managed compute; the break-even point depends on build volume and how much custom logic your workflows require.
Build it, buy it, or bridge?
When building makes sense
Self-hosting CI/CD — running Jenkins, Tekton, Drone, or Woodpecker on your own infrastructure — earns its keep at high build volumes and in specific security contexts. GitHub cut hosted runner prices in January 2026, but the math still shifts at roughly 15,000 to 20,000 build minutes per month where per-minute compute costs on managed platforms outpace the engineering overhead of maintaining a runner fleet. The stronger case is security posture: teams where code cannot leave on-premises, where build environments must be audited, or where custom hardware (GPUs, ARM, specialized test rigs) is needed have a clear reason to own the execution layer. Release velocity is genuinely strategic — how fast you ship directly affects competitive position — and owning the pipeline removes vendor surprises from rate changes or feature deprecations. The custom logic argument also holds: when your pipeline encodes complex promotion rules, compliance approval chains, or environment-specific deployment strategies, the friction of bending a hosted platform to your workflow often costs more than running your own. Platform engineering teams at companies like Netflix and Spotify have documented internal CI/CD systems built on these principles for exactly these reasons.
When buying makes sense
Buying managed CI/CD makes practical sense for most teams in 2026. GitHub Actions reduced hosted runner pricing significantly — Linux down 25%, macOS down 40% — and the free tiers on GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket cover a meaningful amount of smaller-scale work. The time-to-value is real: a first pipeline in GitHub Actions can be running in under an hour without touching any infrastructure. The operational burden of managing runner fleets, patching executors, handling autoscaling during peak load, and maintaining secrets infrastructure consistently dominates the total cost when it's priced honestly. Managed platforms also absorb the complexity of caching, dependency proxying, and artifact storage that teams often underestimate when scoping a self-hosted setup. For small to mid-size teams without dedicated platform engineering resources, that overhead is a real cost. The utilization question matters too: most teams use core CI/CD features heavily but pay for advanced parallel runners and deployment environments they use partially. Evaluating which tier actually matches your build volume is worth doing before committing to either extreme.
The desk read
GitHub cut hosted runner prices meaningfully in early 2026 while simultaneously introducing fees for self-hosted runners, which is a clear signal about where the incumbent sees the economics going. For most teams, managed GitHub Actions or GitLab CI price out reasonably and eliminate the operational burden of maintaining runner fleets. The free tiers cover a surprising amount of smaller-scale development work.
The build case, which here usually means self-hosting Jenkins, Tekton, or Drone, earns its keep when you're running high enough build volumes that per-minute compute pricing becomes significant, when your security posture requires builds to run on-premises, or when your CI workflows have enough custom logic that a hosted platform's constraints become friction. Release velocity is genuinely strategic, and owning the pipeline means no surprises from vendor rate limit changes or feature deprecations. The math shifts toward self-hosting past roughly 15,000 to 20,000 build minutes per month.
Vendors in CI/CD
Each file covers what the product is, its funding history, and when the index last verified it alive.
Frequently asked
What is CI/CD?
CI/CD software automates the process of building, testing, and deploying code changes — running test suites every time code is pushed, packaging artifacts, and pushing releases through staging to production so teams can ship faster with fewer manual steps.
When does building CI/CD make sense?
Self-hosting makes sense past roughly 15,000–20,000 build minutes per month where compute costs on managed platforms become material, when security requirements keep builds on-premises, or when your workflows need custom hardware or complex promotion logic that hosted platforms constrain.
When does buying CI/CD make sense?
Buying makes sense for most teams — managed pricing has fallen, free tiers are generous, and the operational overhead of runner fleet management usually exceeds what the license costs for teams without dedicated platform engineering.
What are the main CI/CD vendors?
Representative vendors include GitHub Actions, CircleCI, GitLab CI, Jenkins. B4 Pro scores the full set.
Did GitHub Actions pricing change recently?
Yes. GitHub cut hosted runner prices in January 2026 — Linux down 25%, Windows down 37.5%, macOS down 40% — while simultaneously adding fees for self-hosted runner registration, which shifted the economics toward managed hosting for most teams.