Softwr

Cloud · head to head

Infracost vs Rollup

Infracost logo

Infracost

Cloud

Cloud cost estimates in pull requests, with governance in the paid tier

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Rollup logo

Rollup

Web Development

JavaScript module bundler built for libraries

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Infracost usage-based resources such as object storage, serverless functions and data transfer have no cost without monthly usage figures supplied by hand, and the documentation warns plainly that engineers otherwise read them as free.; Rollup slower than the Go and Rust bundlers that followed it, since it is written in JavaScript
  • They diverge on capability: Infracost covers Pull request cost diffs, Rollup covers Tree shaking.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Infracost and Rollup actually diverge.

Attributes where Infracost and Rollup differ
AttributeInfracostRollup
Pricing modelFree open source tool, then per month by run volumeOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsWeb, macOS, Linux, Windows, DockerLinux, macOS, Windows
CategoryCloudWeb Development

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), 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 Infracost

  • Pull request cost diffs
  • Multi-format parsing
  • Apache-2.0 CLI
  • FinOps policies
  • Automated remediation
  • IDE integration

Only in Rollup

  • Tree shaking
  • Clean output
  • Multiple output formats
  • Plugin API

What people use each for

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

Infracost

  • Teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoicenot Rollup
  • Platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at allnot Rollup
  • Organisations adopting FinOps practice without buying a full cloud management platformnot Rollup
  • Engineers who want a cost figure in the editor while writing the Terraformnot Rollup

Rollup

  • Publishing a JavaScript library in several module formatsnot Infracost
  • Builds where output size and cleanliness matter more than build speednot Infracost
  • Producing ES module output for consumers who will bundle it themselvesnot Infracost

Where each one falls short

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

Infracost

  • Usage-based resources such as object storage, serverless functions and data transfer have no cost without monthly usage figures supplied by hand, and the documentation warns plainly that engineers otherwise read them as free.
  • Splitting production from non-production usage assumptions is not supported in the free usage file, which the docs attribute to a missing project filter, so that separation requires the paid product.
  • The step from 250 to 1,000 dollars a month is large and the Cloud tier includes only ten admin seats, with developer seats charged at a figure that is not published, so the cost for a large organisation cannot be computed from the pricing page.
  • Estimates are list price. Negotiated agreements, committed use discounts and reserved instance economics require SKU-level overrides available only on Enterprise, so the number in the pull request is not the number on the bill.
  • The share of the product covered by the Apache-2.0 licence is shrinking. Checks, automated fixes, policies and agent integrations are all hosted-only, so the permissive licence increasingly protects the estimation engine rather than the product.

Rollup

  • Slower than the Go and Rust bundlers that followed it, since it is written in JavaScript
  • Application concerns like dev servers and hot reloading are not its job, so app builds need Vite on top
  • Configuration for non-trivial applications gets verbose compared with tools that assume more

Pricing, plan by plan

Infracost

Free
  • FreeFree
    • 1,000 runs a month
    • Terraform, CloudFormation and CDK estimates
    • Community support
  • Starter$250/month
    • 10,000 runs a month
    • Email support
  • Cloud$1000/month
    • Ten admin seats, developer seats charged separately
    • FinOps policies and cost guardrails
    • Dashboards and audit trails
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • SKU-level price overrides for negotiated rates
    • Business unit reporting
    • SSO with SAML group mapping

Rollup

Free
  • RollupFree
    • Full functionality
    • Commercial use permitted
    • Community support

Which should you pick?

Choose Infracost if

  • You need pull request cost diffs.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Web, macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want multi-format parsing.
Infracost review

Choose Rollup if

  • You need tree shaking.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows.
  • You also want clean output.
Rollup review

Questions people ask

Is Infracost or Rollup better?
Neither clearly leads. Infracost starts at Free and Rollup at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Infracost or Rollup?
Infracost starts at Free and Rollup at Free.
Does Infracost or Rollup run on more platforms?
Infracost runs on Web, macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker. Rollup runs on Linux, macOS, Windows.
Can I use Infracost for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Infracost best used for?
Infracost is most often used for teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoice, platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at all, organisations adopting finops practice without buying a full cloud management platform, engineers who want a cost figure in the editor while writing the terraform. Of those, teams that want an expensive infrastructure change questioned at review rather than discovered on an invoice and platform groups enforcing tagging so cloud spend can be attributed to a team at all are not what Rollup is typically brought in for.
What can Infracost do that Rollup cannot?
Infracost covers Pull request cost diffs, Multi-format parsing, Apache-2.0 CLI, FinOps policies. Rollup covers Tree shaking, Clean output, Multiple output formats, Plugin API.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Infracost: Is the open source version genuinely useful on its own?

Yes, for estimation. It parses your definitions and produces breakdowns and diffs locally. What it does not do is comment on pull requests, enforce policy or report across an organisation, all of which are hosted-only.

Rollup: Is Rollup free?

Yes, open source under the MIT licence.

Infracost: Will the estimate match my cloud bill?

No. It is list price. Committed use discounts, enterprise agreements and reserved instances need SKU-level overrides that sit in the Enterprise tier.

Rollup: Rollup or webpack?

Rollup is the usual choice for libraries thanks to cleaner output and better tree shaking. webpack remains stronger for complex applications with heavy asset handling.

Infracost: Why do my S3 and Lambda resources show no cost?

Usage-based resources need monthly usage values supplied in a usage file or defined centrally. Without them they estimate at zero, which is the documented behaviour and the most common way the tool misleads.

Rollup: Do I need Rollup if I use Vite?

Not directly. Vite uses Rollup for production builds, so you already benefit from it.

Infracost: Has the licence ever changed?

No. The command line tool has been Apache 2.0 throughout, with no Business Source or AGPL episode, which is unusual in this category.

Infracost: What is a run?

Not defined on the public pricing page, and the run allowance is what separates the free and Starter tiers, so establish the definition before choosing between them.

Share

Related pages

More on Infracost

More on Rollup

Keep looking

Other head to heads