Spacelift users often run into the same headaches: unpredictable concurrency costs, complex custom workflows, and governance that feels heavier than it should. Several strong platforms now handle remote state, policy enforcement, drift detection, PR reviews, and multi-tool support just as well or better while cutting the friction. They bring predictable pricing, self-hosted options for secure environments, tighter multi-cloud governance, or dead-simple collaboration. The result: less time fighting infra tooling, more time shipping features. Teams switch when Spacelift stops feeling like the right fit. The best choice depends on team size, compliance pressure, multi-cloud reality, and how much customization is actually needed. Most offer free tiers or quick trials-worth spinning one up to see what really speeds things up.
1. AppFirst
AppFirst takes a straightforward approach to getting applications running in the cloud. Developers describe what the app actually needs-like compute resources, a database, networking basics, or a container image-and the platform handles provisioning the underlying infrastructure automatically. It skips the usual hassle of writing Terraform modules, dealing with YAML configs, or setting up VPCs manually. Built-in pieces cover logging, monitoring, alerting, security standards, and cost tracking broken down by app and environment. The whole thing runs across AWS, Azure, and GCP, with the option to go SaaS or self-hosted depending on control preferences. It’s aimed squarely at teams who want to ship code without constant infra distractions or building custom tooling.
One noticeable aspect is how aggressively it pushes “no infra team required”-developers own the full app lifecycle while the platform quietly manages compliance and best practices behind the scenes. Switching clouds doesn’t force rewrites since the app definition stays consistent. For fast-moving groups tired of review bottlenecks or onboarding new engineers to homegrown frameworks, it feels like a relief valve. Still, it’s early-stage enough that some features are listed as coming soon, so real-world maturity might vary.
Key Highlights:
- Automatic provisioning based on simple app definitions
- Multi-cloud support across AWS, Azure, GCP
- Built-in observability, security, and per-app cost visibility
- SaaS or self-hosted deployment choices
- Focus on eliminating Terraform/YAML/VPC manual work
Pros:
- Developers stay focused on features instead of cloud plumbing
- Quick secure infra spin-up without delays
- Transparent costs and audit trails included
- No need to maintain internal infra frameworks
Cons:
- Still in early access with waitlist for some parts
- Less emphasis on advanced policy customization compared to dedicated IaC orchestrators
- Might feel too abstracted if teams already invested heavily in Terraform workflows
Contact Information:
- Website: www.appfirst.dev
2. HashiCorp
HashiCorp builds tools centered on managing infrastructure and security as code, primarily through a suite that includes Terraform for provisioning, along with other pieces for orchestration and secrets. The Infrastructure Cloud concept ties things together for multi-cloud and hybrid setups, letting organizations automate workflows while keeping a central record of changes. HashiCorp Cloud Platform provides managed services for easier operations, though self-hosted enterprise versions remain available. Open source roots run deep, with core projects freely available, which helps build community input and avoids full vendor lock-in in many cases.
The workflow focus stands out-it’s less about raw tech features and more about solving practical pain points for operators juggling different environments. Products get used in critical systems at large organizations, emphasizing efficiency, security controls, and scalability without forcing everything into one rigid mold. Some find the breadth useful for long-term standardization, but others note it can involve more pieces to integrate than a single-purpose platform.
Key Highlights:
- Terraform as flagship for IaC provisioning
- Support for hybrid and multi-cloud automation
- Managed cloud services via HashiCorp Cloud Platform
- Self-hosted enterprise options alongside open source cores
- Emphasis on security lifecycle alongside infrastructure
Pros:
- Strong open source foundation with community backing
- Comprehensive coverage for provisioning and security
- Flexible deployment models (managed or self-hosted)
- Proven at scale in enterprise settings
Cons:
- Multiple tools can mean more to learn and integrate
- Some workflows feel broader rather than laser-focused on deployment automation
- Recent changes in ownership have sparked questions about future direction
Contact Information:
- Website: www.hashicorp.com
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/hashicorp
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/HashiCorp
- Twitter: x.com/hashicorp
3. env0
env0 centers on bringing governance and speed to infrastructure deployments without slowing teams down. It supports a range of IaC tools and automates the full lifecycle from planning through to post-deploy checks. Self-service portals let developers spin up resources with guardrails already applied, while platform folks get policy-as-code enforcement, drift handling, and cost controls. Audit logs, RBAC, and approval steps keep things compliant, and integrations pull in observability or scanning tools as needed. The setup works across major clouds and VCS systems, with options for self-hosted agents when required.
What strikes one as practical is the drift detection and remediation flow—spotting mismatches early and offering ways to fix them without endless manual chasing. Cost visibility comes through real-time estimates and alerts, which helps avoid surprises. Teams dealing with sprawl or inconsistent practices across departments tend to appreciate the standardization it enforces quietly. It’s not flashy, but it tackles the chaos of scaling IaC head-on.
Key Highlights:
- Broad IaC tool support with automated workflows
- Self-service deployments plus policy and approval guardrails
- Drift detection, analysis, and remediation
- Cost governance with estimates, budgets, and tagging
- Strong focus on auditability and risk management
Pros:
- Reduces manual coordination in large teams
- Proactive drift handling saves troubleshooting time
- Clear cost insights before changes hit production
- Flexible integrations with existing tools
Cons:
- Can feel feature-heavy if only basic runs are needed
- Setup might take time to tune guardrails properly
- Less emphasis on pure developer abstraction compared to some newer entrants
Contact Information:
- Website: www.env0.com
- Address: 100 Causeway Street, Suite 900, 02114 United States
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/env0
- Twitter: x.com/envzero
4. Scalr
Scalr delivers a Terraform-focused management layer geared toward platform engineers handling cloud at scale. It provides isolated environments per team, flexible RBAC, and support for different run styles including CLI, no-code modules, or GitOps flows. Unlimited concurrency stands out—no waiting in queues during busy periods. OpenTofu gets native backing since the platform helped launch it as an open continuation. Compliance features include SOC2 Type 2 and a dedicated trust center for audits. Reporting covers modules, providers, run history, and observability hooks like Datadog integration.
It’s interesting how it balances autonomy for teams with organization-wide visibility—tags make scoping reports or policies easier without constant oversight. For groups migrating or standardizing after open source shifts, the drop-in feel helps. Some note it’s particularly clean for self-hosted or security-sensitive setups where control matters more than bells and whistles.
Key Highlights:
- Isolated team environments with independent debugging
- Support for Terraform and OpenTofu workflows
- Unlimited/free concurrency on runs
- Flexible RBAC and pipeline observability
- Compliance certifications and trust resources
Pros:
- No concurrency bottlenecks during peak usage
- Good for maintaining hygiene across many users
- Strong OpenTofu alignment post-fork
- Clear reporting at account and workspace levels
Cons:
- More oriented toward Terraform/OpenTofu than multi-IaC breadth
- Might require extra integrations for advanced cost or drift features
- Interface can feel functional rather than modern in spots
Contact Information:
- Website: scalr.com
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/scalr
- Twitter: x.com/scalr
5. Atlantis
Atlantis runs Terraform directly inside pull requests to keep changes visible and controlled before anything hits production. Developers submit plans, see outputs in comments, get required approvals for applies, and everything logs cleanly for audits. It stays self-hosted so credentials never leave the environment, and it plugs into common VCS systems without much fuss. The simplicity appeals to groups already using Git workflows who just need a safety net around Terraform runs.
One thing that feels dated yet reliable is how it has stuck around since 2017 with steady community use – no flashy dashboard overkill, just solid PR automation. For smaller or mid-sized setups it’s straightforward, though larger orgs sometimes outgrow the lack of built-in advanced governance or multi-tool support.
Key Highlights:
- Terraform plan and apply executed in pull requests
- Configurable approvals and audit logging
- Self-hosted deployment on various platforms
- Support for GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps
- Open source with community contributions
Pros:
- Keeps secrets secure by staying in your infrastructure
- Catches errors early through PR feedback
- Simple to set up for teams already in GitOps mode
- No external service dependency for core runs
Cons:
- Lacks native drift detection or advanced policy features
- Can require extra glue code for complex workflows
- Interface stays basic rather than polished
Contact Information:
- Website: www.runatlantis.io
- Twitter: x.com/runatlantis
6. Digger (OpenTaco)
Digger, now rebranded under the OpenTaco project name, lets Terraform and OpenTofu run natively inside existing CI pipelines instead of spinning up a separate orchestration layer. Plans and applications show up as PR comments, locks prevent race conditions, and policies can enforce rules via OPA. Everything executes in the user’s own CI computer – GitHub Actions or similar – which keeps secrets local and avoids extra costs. Drift detection adds a layer of monitoring for unexpected changes.
What makes it feel clever is reusing the CI you already pay for and trust, rather than layering another tool on top. The open-source nature and self-hostable orchestrator give flexibility, though setup involves a bit more wiring than fully managed options. For teams allergic to vendor lock-in or redundant infrastructure it’s a refreshing take.
Key Highlights:
- Native Terraform/OpenTofu execution in existing CI
- Pull request comments for plan and apply outputs
- OPA for policy enforcement and RBAC
- PR-level locking and drift detection
- Open source with self-hostable components
Pros:
- No third-party compute means better secret security
- Leverages current CI costs instead of adding new ones
- Works well with apply-before-merge patterns
- Unlimited runs tied to your CI limits
Cons:
- Requires some initial configuration in CI workflows
- Less out-of-the-box governance than dedicated platforms
- Rebranding might cause minor confusion during transition
Contact Information:
- Website: github.com/diggerhq/digger
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/github
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/GitHub
- Twitter: x.com/github
7. Firefly
Firefly uses AI agents to continuously scan cloud environments, turn unmanaged resources into Terraform or OpenTofu code, and keep everything version-controlled. It handles drift by detecting mismatches and suggesting or applying fixes with context from dependencies and policies. Change tracking follows modifications from code to deployment, while asset management acts like a modern CMDB with ownership and history. Disaster recovery builds on IaC backups for quick restores and redeployments.
The agentic flow – scan, codify, govern, recover – feels ambitious in trying to automate the full lifecycle loop. Some parts shine for teams with lots of legacy or shadow infra, but the heavy AI involvement might make troubleshooting less intuitive if things go sideways. Multi-cloud support and CI/CD ties make it practical across setups.
Key Highlights:
- AI agents for automatic IaC generation and drift remediation
- Comprehensive cloud asset inventory and change tracking
- Policy-as-code governance with pre-production checks
- Disaster recovery through IaC backups and redeployment
- Support for Terraform, OpenTofu, and multi-cloud environments
Pros:
- Pushes toward full IaC coverage without manual rewriting
- Context-aware fixes reduce guesswork on drift
- Useful for compliance and audit-heavy environments
- Recovery features address real outage concerns
Cons:
- AI-driven decisions can feel black-box at times
- Might add overhead if only basic orchestration is needed
- Less focus on pure PR-based workflows
Contact Information:
- Website: www.firefly.ai
- Email: contact@firefly.ai
- Address: 311 Port Royal Ave, Foster City, CA 9440
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/fireflyai
- Twitter: x.com/fireflydotai
8. Pulumi
Pulumi lets engineers manage infrastructure using regular programming languages like Python, TypeScript, Go, or C# instead of declarative YAML or domain-specific languages. The approach feels more natural for developers already comfortable with loops, conditionals, and libraries – no need to learn a separate syntax just for infra. It handles provisioning, updates, and state tracking while supporting major clouds and many providers out of the box. The open source SDK forms the core, with a cloud service available for remote state, collaboration features, and easier secrets handling.
One thing that stands out is how it blurs the line between app code and infra code – everything lives in the same repo with the same review process. Some folks love the familiarity and power of real code, but others find it overkill if simple declarative configs already work fine. The community side seems active with contributions and learning resources, which helps when hitting edge cases.
Key Highlights:
- Infrastructure defined in general-purpose languages
- Open source SDK with broad provider ecosystem
- Supports preview, diff, and update workflows
- Cloud service for state management and collaboration
- Integration with existing dev tools and workflows
Pros:
- Familiar programming constructs make complex logic easier
- Same language for apps and infra reduces context switching
- Strong community and ecosystem for extensions
- Good for teams already deep in certain languages
Cons:
- Steeper learning curve if not used to programming-style IaC
- Can lead to more verbose configs than pure declarative tools
- State management might require extra setup without the cloud service
Contact Information:
- Website: www.pulumi.com
- Address: 601 Union St., Suite 1415 Seattle, WA 98101
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/pulumi
- Twitter: x.com/pulumicorp
9. Crossplane
Crossplane extends Kubernetes to manage cloud resources and other external services through custom APIs and control planes. It runs as an open source operator inside a cluster, letting platform builders compose higher-level abstractions on top of providers for AWS, Azure, GCP, and more. Resources get provisioned declaratively via YAML manifests, with composition handling dependencies, policies, and defaults behind the scenes. The setup aims to give application teams a self-service experience that feels like using a cloud provider’s console but stays within Kubernetes.
What makes it interesting is the control plane philosophy – instead of bolting on yet another tool, it reuses Kubernetes primitives for orchestration. For orgs already all-in on K8s it can feel like a logical extension, though the initial provider and composition setup takes some effort. Drift handling and reconciliation come built-in, which helps keep things in sync without constant manual intervention.
Key Highlights:
- Kubernetes-native control planes for infrastructure
- Provider packages for major clouds and services
- Composition and composite resources for custom APIs
- Open source CNCF project with community contributions
- Reconciliation loop for drift detection and repair
Pros:
- Leverages existing Kubernetes knowledge and tooling
- Enables custom platform APIs with built-in guardrails
- Consistent declarative model across resources
- Avoids external orchestration layers in many cases
Cons:
- Requires a running Kubernetes cluster to operate
- Composition layer adds complexity for simple use cases
- Provider maturity varies depending on the cloud/service
Contact Information:
- Website: www.crossplane.io
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/crossplane
- Twitter: x.com/crossplane_io
10. Harness
Harness bundles a bunch of delivery tools into one platform, with a chunk dedicated to infrastructure as code orchestration alongside CI/CD, feature flags, chaos engineering, and more. For IaC specifically, it supports Terraform runs in pipelines, policy checks, approval gates, and remote state handling while tying everything into broader software delivery workflows. The setup lets changes flow through the same gates as app code, with visibility from commit to production. Self-hosted options exist for tighter control, though the managed cloud service handles most heavy lifting out of the box.
One observation hits when you see how it leans hard into the full delivery pipeline – infra changes don’t live in isolation but get treated like any other deploy step. That integration can cut down on tool sprawl for shops already using the platform for builds and releases, but it might feel bloated if the only pain point is pure Terraform orchestration. The breadth means more surface area to configure upfront, yet once dialed in, the end-to-end traceability appeals to places where audit trails matter a lot.
Key Highlights:
- Terraform orchestration within broader CI/CD pipelines
- Policy enforcement and approval workflows for infra changes
- Remote state management and drift awareness in runs
- Integration with feature flags and deployment strategies
- Managed cloud service plus self-hosted deployment choices
Pros:
- Keeps infra changes in the same pipeline as application code
- Strong audit and traceability across the delivery process
- Reduces switching between separate tools for builds and infra
- Approval gates help enforce change controls naturally
Cons:
- Can feel like overkill for teams focused only on IaC
- Setup complexity grows with the full suite of features
- Less laser-focused on advanced Terraform-specific governance
Contact Information:
- Website: www.harness.io
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/harnessinc
- Facebook: www.facebook.com/harnessinc
- Twitter: x.com/harnessio
- Instagram: www.instagram.com/harness.io
11. Terrateam
Terrateam brings GitOps-style automation straight into GitHub pull requests for infrastructure tools. It runs plans and applies automatically on PRs, handles dependencies across repos or monorepos, and lets things execute in parallel without blocking thanks to apply-only locks. Cost estimates pop up in comments, drift gets flagged, and policies use OPA or Rego to enforce rules before anything merges. The whole setup stays flexible with support for multiple IaC flavors plus any CLI you throw at it. Self-hosting keeps runners, state, and secrets under your control since it’s stateless by design.
Built with big monorepos in mind, tag-based configs make it easier to apply the same rules everywhere without repeating yourself endlessly. The UI tracks every run and logs for debugging stay available even in the open-source version. Some setups might feel a touch heavier if you only need basic plans, but for folks juggling thousands of workspaces or complex deps it cuts down on a lot of manual coordination.
Key Highlights:
- Pull request automation for plans and applies
- Support for Terraform, OpenTofu, Terragrunt, CDKTF, Pulumi, and any CLI
- Smart apply-only locking for parallel execution
- Drift detection and cost estimation in PRs
- OPA/Rego policy enforcement with RBAC
- Tag-based configuration for scale and monorepos
- Self-hostable with stateless design
Pros:
- Handles monorepo complexity without choking
- Parallel plans speed things up noticeably
- Secrets and state stay in your environment when self-hosted
- Good visibility and debugging even in open-source
Cons:
- Tied closely to GitHub workflows
- Might need extra config tuning for very simple projects
- Policy composability takes time to wrap your head around
Contact Information:
- Website: github.com/terrateamio/terrateam
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/github
- Twitter: x.com/github
- Instagram: www.instagram.com/github
12. ControlMonkey
ControlMonkey pushes toward full end-to-end IaC management by scanning live cloud setups and generating Terraform code automatically with AI to bring everything under control. Drift detection spots mismatches from ClickOps or manual changes, then offers remediation steps to realign state. It adds governed CI/CD pipelines with policy checks, self-service catalogs for compliant resources, and daily snapshots that make disaster recovery faster by restoring configs instead of rebuilding from scratch. Inventory views track coverage and changes across clouds.
The agentic angle stands out – agents handle ongoing scanning and automation so manual chasing drops off. For environments with lots of legacy or shadow infra it provides a path to codify without starting over. Some might find the AI-generated code needs extra review to trust fully, but it tackles sprawl head-on when point tools start failing.
Key Highlights:
- AI-driven Terraform code generation from existing resources
- Drift detection and automated remediation
- Governed GitOps CI/CD pipelines
- Self-service catalogs with compliance guardrails
- Full cloud inventory and change tracking
- Daily snapshots for infrastructure recovery
Pros:
- Closes IaC coverage gaps quickly on existing infra
- Reduces manual drift fixing time
- Built-in recovery gives some breathing room during incidents
- Standardizes delivery across multi-cloud
Cons:
- AI code gen can feel a bit hands-off for purists
- Setup involves getting policies and catalogs right
- Less emphasis on pure open-source self-hosting
Contact Information:
- Website: controlmonkey.io
- LinkedIn: www.linkedin.com/company/controlmonkey
Conclusion
Picking the right tool to handle your infra orchestration comes down to what actually hurts right now. If concurrency bills keep spiking or you’re stuck waiting in queues during deployments, something with predictable scaling might feel like breathing room. If secrets leaking to a third party keeps you up at night, staying self-hosted or running everything inside your own CI suddenly looks a lot smarter. And when drift sneaks in or compliance starts breathing down your neck, the platforms that spot mismatches early and push fixes – without you having to chase every alert – tend to win the day. No single option fits every shop perfectly. Some shine when you want dead-simple PR workflows, others when you’re building custom guardrails on top of Kubernetes-style control planes, and a few just let developers write code the way they already think without forcing a whole new syntax. The real move is spinning up a couple in a sandbox, throwing your messiest repo at them, and seeing which one actually gets stuff shipped faster instead of adding another layer of meetings. Most have free tiers or quick trials for exactly that reason. Test a few, measure the friction drop, and you’ll know pretty quick which one stops feeling like another problem to solve.
