Info
Harbor is the best overall pick if your team is willing to self-host, since it's free, open source, and bundles vulnerability scanning and RBAC that other free options lack. Amazon ECR, Azure Container Registry, and Google Artifact Registry are the better default for teams already committed to that cloud provider. All seven were compared on pricing, storage/transfer costs, MCP support, and API depth.
Harbor is the best overall container registry for teams that want a complete, vendor-neutral registry without a recurring bill, as long as someone on the team is comfortable running and patching it. Amazon ECR, Azure Container Registry, or Google Artifact Registry is the better choice for the most common case: a team already deploying compute on that specific cloud, where the native registry removes an extra billing relationship and often the network cost of pulling images cross-provider.
Why You Need a Dedicated Container Registry
- Faster, more reliable deployments. Pulling images from a registry close to your compute (same cloud, same region) cuts deploy latency versus routing through a public, rate-limited default.
- Real access control on what ships. Private repositories with RBAC mean not everyone on the team, or outside it, can push or pull production images.
- Built-in vulnerability visibility. Most registries here scan images on push, catching a known CVE before it reaches a running container instead of after.
- A single source of truth for every build. Tagged, versioned images replace ad hoc file shares or rebuilding from source every time something needs to redeploy.
- Room to scale without hitting public rate limits. Docker Hub's public pull limits have pushed plenty of teams toward a private or cloud-native registry once CI/CD volume grows.
How We Evaluated
Each registry was scored on pricing transparency, storage and transfer cost structure, AI/MCP and API maturity, and deployment flexibility (managed vs. self-hosted). Every pricing and feature claim below came from the vendor's own pricing page or official documentation. Full scoring criteria live in our methodology.
1. Harbor
Harbor is what you reach for when you want everything a commercial registry offers without paying a vendor for it. It's a CNCF Graduated project, the same governance tier as Kubernetes itself.
Pricing: Free and open source. No vendor sells "Harbor" tiers; you run it yourself.
Top Features
- Vulnerability scanning with policy enforcement
- Content trust and image signing
- Role-based access control with LDAP/AD and OIDC integration
- Policy-based replication across registries
- Multi-tenant projects with a full web UI
- Garbage collection and audit logging
Pros
- No licensing cost at any scale
- Bundles scanning, signing, and RBAC that many paid registries charge extra for
- Deployable via Docker Compose, Helm chart, or the Harbor Operator
Cons
- No official managed SaaS tier, so you own the uptime and patching
- No official MCP server as of this writing
AI/MCP Integration: Community only. A few independent MCP wrapper projects exist on GitHub; none are endorsed by the Harbor project.
API Integration: Yes. A full RESTful API v2.0 with a published OpenAPI/Swagger spec.
Cloud Based: No dedicated SaaS from the project itself. On-prem: yes, via Docker Compose, Helm chart, or Kubernetes Operator, on amd64 or arm64.
Best For: Teams that want a complete, self-hosted registry and are comfortable operating it.
Editor score: 4.6/5. The feature set rivals paid products; the missing managed-hosting option is the only real gap.
2. Docker Hub
Docker Hub is still the default most engineers think of first, and it's the only registry here with a first-party official MCP server already shipped.
Pricing: Personal $0/month (1 private repo, 100 pulls/hour). Pro $9/user/month billed annually. Team $15/user/month billed annually, up to 100 users. Business $24/user/month, unlimited users, SSO and SCIM included.
Top Features
- Unlimited public repositories
- Docker Scout vulnerability and CVE scanning
- OCI artifact support for Helm charts, SBOMs, and signatures
- Docker Verified Publisher program
- Webhook automation for CI/CD and scanning
- Web UI, CLI, API, and official MCP server access
Pros
- Largest public image ecosystem by a wide margin
- Official, vendor-maintained MCP server, not a community wrapper
- Docker Scout scanning is built in, not a paid add-on at every tier
Cons
- Free tier caps pull rate at 100/hour and allows only 1 private repository
- No self-hosted or on-premise variant of Docker Hub itself
AI/MCP Integration: Official. Docker publishes and maintains the Docker Hub MCP Server in its own MCP Catalog.
API Integration: Yes. A documented REST API with an interactive OpenAPI spec.
Cloud Based: Yes, fully hosted SaaS. On-prem option: no (self-hosting requires the separate open-source Docker Registry project, not Docker Hub itself).
Best For: Teams that want the largest public ecosystem plus a genuinely official AI-agent integration.
Editor score: 4.5/5. Free-tier limits are the main friction point once a team grows past a single private repo.
3. Azure Container Registry
Azure Container Registry is the natural default for teams already running AKS or other Azure compute, with geo-replication as its headline feature once you're on the Premium tier.
Pricing: Basic ~$5/month (10 GB storage). Standard ~$20/month (100 GB storage). Premium ~$50/month (500 GB storage, geo-replication, connected registry for edge/disconnected sites).
Top Features
- Geo-replication across Azure regions
- OCI artifact and Helm chart support
- Automated image building and patching via ACR Tasks
- Microsoft Entra ID authentication with RBAC
- Microsoft Defender for Containers vulnerability scanning
- Private network integration with VNets and firewall rules
Pros
- Deep native integration with AKS, Entra ID, and Defender
- Real geo-replication for multi-region pulls, not a third-party bolt-on
- Official Microsoft-maintained MCP server support
Cons
- Geo-replication and connected registry are Premium-only, a real jump from the Standard tier
- No independent on-premise deployment; connected registry only syncs to edge sites, it doesn't replace the Azure-hosted core
AI/MCP Integration: Official. Microsoft's Azure MCP Server explicitly lists Azure Container Registry among its supported services.
API Integration: Yes. A full REST API plus SDKs for .NET, Python, JavaScript, and the Azure CLI.
Cloud Based: Yes. On-prem option: partial, via the Premium tier's connected registry feature for edge sync only.
Best For: Teams already standardized on Azure and AKS who need multi-region image distribution.
Editor score: 4.4/5. Strong integration story; the Premium-only gate on the most valuable features is the one real limitation.
4. Amazon ECR
Amazon ECR is the quiet, low-drama default for anyone deploying to ECS, EKS, or Lambda, priced almost entirely on raw storage.
Pricing: $0.10/GB-month for private storage beyond the free tier (500 MB/month free for 12 months on new accounts). Public repository storage up to 50 GB/month is always free, with generous free data transfer for public pulls.
Top Features
- Fully managed registry with native ECS, EKS, and Lambda integration
- IAM-based resource policies for private repositories
- Public Gallery of shared and verified base images
- Encryption in transit and at rest, with optional KMS keys
- Pull-through cache that mirrors upstream public registries
- Managed image scanning and image signing
Pros
- Simple, storage-based pricing with a genuinely generous public tier
- Backed by S3's durability guarantees
- IAM integration means no separate credential system to manage
Cons
- Tightly coupled to AWS; using it outside AWS pipelines needs extra setup
- No dedicated official MCP server for ECR itself
AI/MCP Integration: Community/AWS Labs only. An AWS Labs open-source ecs-mcp-server can reference ECR images as part of broader ECS resource management; it's not a first-party ECR product.
API Integration: Yes. A full REST API, AWS SDKs, and the AWS CLI.
Cloud Based: Yes. On-prem option: no.
Best For: Teams already deploying to ECS, EKS, or Lambda who want registry billing folded into their existing AWS account.
Editor score: 4.3/5. Reliable and cheap for AWS-native teams; the missing first-party MCP server is the one gap against Docker Hub and Azure.
5. Google Artifact Registry
Google Artifact Registry replaced Google Container Registry outright and now handles container images alongside language packages in one place.
Pricing: First 0.5 GiB-month free, then roughly $0.10/GiB-month for storage. Cross-region transfer ranges from $0.01/GiB (within North America) to $0.15/GiB (to Oceania); intra-region transfer is free.
Top Features
- Universal package support: Docker/OCI, Maven, npm, Python, Apt, Yum, and Go modules
- Regional and multi-regional repositories groupable by team or stage
- Native CI/CD wiring into Cloud Build, GKE, and Cloud Run
- Repository-level IAM access control
- Built-in vulnerability scanning via Artifact Analysis
- Remote and virtual repositories that proxy Docker Hub, Maven Central, and PyPI
Pros
- One registry for container images and every major language package format
- Zero-config integration across the Google Cloud build and deploy chain
- Predictable, low per-GB storage pricing
Cons
- No dedicated MCP server for Artifact Registry specifically
- Retention/cleanup policies are basic out of the box and often need custom scripting for anything beyond simple rules
AI/MCP Integration: None dedicated. It surfaces only as a storage target inside broader, separate Google Cloud MCP tooling.
API Integration: Yes. Both REST and RPC API references are published.
Cloud Based: Yes. On-prem option: no.
Best For: Teams on Google Cloud that want one registry covering containers and language packages together.
Editor score: 4.2/5. Genuinely useful multi-format design; the thin retention tooling is a real day-two annoyance.
Google Container Registry, the older product Artifact Registry replaced, is fully retired: it stopped accepting new writes on March 18, 2025 and stopped serving reads on June 3, 2025, with existing gcr.io URLs now transparently redirected.
6. GitHub Container Registry
GitHub Container Registry is the path of least resistance for any team already running CI/CD inside GitHub Actions, since authentication needs zero extra setup.
Pricing: Free tier includes 500 MB storage and 1 GB/month transfer. Pro is 2 GB storage and 10 GB/month transfer. Enterprise Cloud reaches 50 GB storage and 100 GB/month transfer. Container image storage and bandwidth are currently free per GitHub's own docs, with a stated one-month notice before that changes.
Top Features
- OCI and Docker Image Manifest V2 support, including Windows layers
- Multi-architecture image manifests
GITHUB_TOKEN-based authentication inside Actions, no extra secrets- Granular permissions, inherited from the repo or set independently
- Public, private, or internal visibility per image
- Global CDN-backed pulls with a package deletion and restoration API
Pros
- Zero extra credential setup for teams already using GitHub Actions
- Genuinely free container storage and bandwidth as of this writing
- Multi-architecture support out of the box
Cons
- Hard technical caps: 10 GB per image layer and a 10-minute upload timeout
- On-premise support (GitHub Enterprise Server) is still in public preview, not GA
AI/MCP Integration: None. GitHub's own official MCP server has no Packages or Container Registry toolset among its supported areas.
API Integration: Yes, but scoped. A REST API covers listing, retrieving, and deleting package versions, not full registry administration.
Cloud Based: Yes. On-prem option: yes, in public preview only, via GitHub Enterprise Server.
Best For: Teams already building and deploying through GitHub Actions who want registry auth with no extra setup.
Editor score: 4.1/5. The Actions integration is genuinely frictionless; the layer-size cap and preview-only self-hosting keep it from a higher score.
7. JFrog Artifactory
JFrog Artifactory is the enterprise answer when a container registry alone isn't enough and you need one system managing every package format a company ships.
Pricing: SaaS Pro from $150/month (25 GB base). SaaS Enterprise X from $950/month (125 GB base, HA, federation, SSO). Self-Managed Pro X from $27,000/year for one server. Self-Managed Enterprise X from $51,000/year for three servers. Enterprise + tiers are custom-quoted on both paths.
Top Features
- Docker/OCI/Helm registry via local, remote, and virtual repositories
- Pull-through caching to avoid Docker Hub rate limits
- Fine-grained RBAC with enterprise SSO
- Searchable artifact metadata with custom properties and query language
- Vulnerability scanning, with deeper coverage via the JFrog Xray add-on
- Support for 30+ package formats beyond containers, from npm to NuGet
Pros
- One platform for containers and every other package type a team manages
- Official, vendor-maintained MCP server already GA on SaaS
- Genuine self-managed deployment option for on-prem or hybrid requirements
Cons
- Entry SaaS tier caps out at 25 GB with community-only support
- Self-managed licensing starts at $27,000 a year, out of reach for smaller teams
AI/MCP Integration: Official. The JFrog MCP Server is GA on JFrog Cloud/SaaS and in beta for self-managed deployments.
API Integration: Yes. Full JFrog Platform REST APIs are documented.
Cloud Based: Yes (SaaS Pro/Enterprise tiers). On-prem option: yes, via Self-Managed tiers across AWS, Azure, GCP, or on-prem hardware.
Best For: Enterprises that need one registry covering containers plus every other artifact type they build.
Editor score: 4.2/5. Genuinely universal coverage; the pricing floor rules it out for small teams that only need Docker images.
Comparison Table
| Tool | Best For | Starting Price | Standout Feature | AI-MCP Support | API Integration |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harbor | Self-hosted, vendor-neutral | Free (open source) | Full RBAC + scanning + replication, no license fee | Community | Yes (REST) |
| Docker Hub | Largest public ecosystem | $9/user/mo | Official MCP server | Official | Yes (REST) |
| Azure Container Registry | Azure/AKS-native teams | ~$5/mo (Basic) | Geo-replication (Premium) | Official | Yes (REST) |
| Amazon ECR | ECS/EKS/Lambda-native teams | $0.10/GB-month | S3-backed durability + IAM | Community (AWS Labs) | Yes (REST) |
| Google Artifact Registry | Multi-format package storage | ~$0.10/GiB-month | One registry for containers + language packages | None | Yes (REST + RPC) |
| GitHub Container Registry | GitHub Actions CI/CD | Free (within limits) | Zero-setup GITHUB_TOKEN auth | None | Yes (scoped) |
| JFrog Artifactory | Enterprise, multi-format | $150/mo (SaaS Pro) | Universal repository manager, 30+ formats | Official | Yes (REST) |
How to Choose
- Start with where your compute already runs. A cloud-native registry (ECR, ACR, or Artifact Registry) removes an extra billing relationship and often cuts cross-provider network cost.
- Decide if self-hosting is actually acceptable. Harbor is free, but someone owns its uptime and patching; a managed option trades that cost for a recurring bill.
- Check whether you need more than container images. If you're also managing npm, Maven, or PyPI packages, Google Artifact Registry or JFrog Artifactory cover both in one system.
- Confirm the free-tier limits actually fit your CI/CD volume before committing, since Docker Hub's pull-rate cap and GitHub's layer-size cap have both broken real pipelines at scale.
- If AI-agent tooling matters to your workflow, only three of these seven ship an official MCP server today: Docker Hub, Azure Container Registry, and JFrog Artifactory.
- Weigh vendor lock-in against convenience. The three hyperscaler registries are the easiest to adopt and the hardest to migrate away from later.
What This Actually Costs
Container registry pricing splits into two models: per-gigabyte storage from the hyperscalers versus flat per-seat plans from Docker Hub and JFrog, and which one wins depends entirely on team size versus image volume. A five-person platform team storing roughly 50 GB of container images with moderate CI/CD pull volume sees a wide cost spread depending on the pick. Amazon ECR and Google Artifact Registry both land under $10 a month on storage alone, since both price per gigabyte with no per-seat charge. Azure Container Registry's Standard tier is a flat $20 a month and already includes 100 GB. GitHub Container Registry costs nothing at that volume if the team stays inside GitHub's published limits. Harbor costs nothing in licensing, but realistically needs a small VM to run on, commonly $20 to $40 a month in compute. Docker Hub's Team plan, the tier that removes the private-repository cap, runs $75 a month for five seats. JFrog Artifactory's SaaS Pro tier starts at $150 a month regardless of team size, which only makes sense once you're also using it for non-container package types.
Final Thoughts
Pick Harbor if your team can own the operational overhead and wants zero recurring cost for a genuinely complete feature set. Pick the registry native to your cloud (ECR, ACR, or Artifact Registry) if you want the lowest-friction option and you're already committed to that provider. Reach for JFrog Artifactory only once containers are one of several artifact types you're managing, since its pricing floor doesn't make sense for a Docker-only use case.