Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Garden vs Greenhouse

Garden logo

Garden

Developer Tools

Kubernetes development and testing automation with shared caching, now owned by Incredibuild

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite
Greenhouse logo

Greenhouse

Technology

Hiring software for growing companies

From
On request
Free plan
No
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Garden has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Garden incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.; Greenhouse core plan lacks talent discovery and contact lookups
  • They diverge on capability: Garden covers Action graph, Greenhouse covers Applicant tracking.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Garden and Greenhouse actually diverge.

Attributes where Garden and Greenhouse differ
AttributeGardenGreenhouse
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, KubernetesWeb, Ios, Android, Api
CategoryDeveloper ToolsTechnology
FoundedUnknown2012

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Garden

  • Action graph
  • Shared result caching
  • Remote Kubernetes environments
  • In-cluster builds
  • Same config everywhere
  • Hot reload sync
  • Helm and Kustomize support
  • Templating

Only in Greenhouse

  • Applicant tracking
  • Interview scheduling
  • Scorecard system
  • Job board posting
  • Candidate CRM
  • Reporting & analytics
  • Offer management
  • EEO compliance

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Garden

  • A platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loopnot Greenhouse
  • An organisation with thirty or more services on Kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates productionnot Greenhouse
  • Giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environmentnot Greenhouse
  • Running the identical build and test definition locally and in CI so failures reproduce on a laptopnot Greenhouse

Greenhouse

  • Enterprise hiring and recruiting automationnot Garden
  • Multi-location and multi-team talent acquisitionnot Garden
  • Structured interview process managementnot Garden

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Garden

  • Incredibuild acquired Garden in November 2024 and the pricing page now redirects to documentation, so there is no public commercial offer and no published roadmap for a team betting a platform on it.
  • It is tightly bound to Kubernetes, so teams running on ECS, Nomad, plain VMs or serverless get little from it and would need a different tool entirely.
  • The YAML action graph is a real configuration surface: a large monorepo needs someone to own and maintain Garden config as a first-class artefact, which is a standing platform-engineering cost.
  • Shared remote environments mean every developer needs cluster access and a cost allocation model, so cloud spend rises and namespace sprawl becomes a thing you have to police.
  • Caching correctness depends on declaring dependencies accurately; an under-declared action will serve a stale cached pass and hide a genuine test failure, which is a hard class of bug to notice.

Greenhouse

  • Core plan lacks talent discovery and contact lookups
  • Core plan lacks email automation and applicant texting
  • Plus plan lacks resume anonymisation and application limits
  • Plus plan lacks audit logging and developer tools
  • Pricing customised by hiring volume and company size, not published
  • Only Pro tier offers audit logs and developer sandbox

Pricing, plan by plan

Garden

Free
  • Garden open sourceFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed CLI
    • Full action graph and caching
    • Self-managed clusters
  • Commercial tier$undefined/year
    • Hosted caching and team features
    • Support and onboarding
    • Pricing no longer published since the Incredibuild acquisition

Greenhouse

On request

No published plan breakdown. See the Greenhouse review.

Which should you pick?

Choose Garden if

  • You need action graph.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes.
  • You also want shared result caching.
Garden review

Choose Greenhouse if

  • You need applicant tracking.
  • You work on Web, Ios, Android, Api.
  • You also want interview scheduling.
Greenhouse review

Questions people ask

Is Garden or Greenhouse better?
Neither clearly leads. Garden starts at Free and Greenhouse at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Garden or Greenhouse?
Garden has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Garden and On request for Greenhouse.
Does Garden or Greenhouse run on more platforms?
Garden runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Kubernetes. Greenhouse runs on Web, Ios, Android, Api.
Can I use Garden for free?
Yes. Garden has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Greenhouse starts at On request.
What is Garden best used for?
Garden is most often used for a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop, an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production, giving every developer an ephemeral namespace instead of queuing for one shared staging environment, running the identical build and test definition locally and in ci so failures reproduce on a laptop. Of those, a platform team whose integration test suite takes longer than the coffee break and needs caching to cut the loop and an organisation with thirty or more services on kubernetes where docker-compose no longer approximates production are not what Greenhouse is typically brought in for.
What can Garden do that Greenhouse cannot?
Garden covers Action graph, Shared result caching, Remote Kubernetes environments, In-cluster builds. Greenhouse covers Applicant tracking, Interview scheduling, Scorecard system, Job board posting.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Garden: Is Garden still maintained?

The open source project remains on GitHub under Incredibuild ownership, but the commercial pricing page redirects to the docs and there is no public paid offer.

Greenhouse: How much does Greenhouse cost?

Greenhouse does not publish specific pricing. The company states that pricing is customized based on your hiring needs, hiring volume, organizational complexity, and required features.

Source
Garden: Do I need Kubernetes?

Effectively yes. Garden is built around Kubernetes environments and offers little to teams on other runtimes.

Greenhouse: What are the Greenhouse pricing tiers?

Greenhouse offers three plan levels: Core (basic hiring structure), Plus (multi-location optimization), and Pro (complex enterprise hiring). Exact pricing requires contacting Greenhouse for a custom quote.

Source
Garden: Does it replace my CI system?

No. It runs inside GitHub Actions, GitLab CI or similar and speeds up what those pipelines execute.

Greenhouse: Do all Greenhouse tiers include the same features?

No. Core includes sourcing and scheduling, Plus adds automation and texting, and Pro adds enterprise data configuration and audit logs. All tiers can be customized.

Source
Garden: What is the actual saving?

It comes from skipping builds and tests whose inputs have not changed, so the benefit scales with how many services you have and how often only a few change.

Share

Related pages

More on Garden

More on Greenhouse

Keep looking

Other head to heads