We may earn a commission if you buy through links on this page. It never changes a score or a ranking. How we make money
For most teams, Bitbucket is the practical starting point: it has a free plan, starts at $3.65 and fits teams already using Jira. If you want to self-host, consider Forgejo or Gitea; if you want a visual desktop Git client, compare GitKraken, Fork and Tower. These tools do different jobs, so the right pick depends on whether you need code hosting, review workflows or a client for working with Git. We rank broad fit and value ahead of specialist features, and flag where prices or limits are unclear.
Quick picksThe shortlist
BitbucketBitbucketBest overall · $3.65/mo
ForgejoForgejoBest free self-hosted · Free- GiteaGiteaBest self-hosted Git · $9.50/mo
GitKrakenGitKrakenBest visual Git toolkit · €4/mo
ForkForkBest one-time purchase · Custom
TowerTowerBest paid Git client · $5.75/mo
Gerrit Code ReviewGerrit Code ReviewBest open-source review · Free
Sublime MergeSublime MergeBest desktop diff review · $6.25/mo
KaleidoscopeKaleidoscopeBest diff and merge tool · $8/mo
GraphiteGraphiteBest stacked PR workflow · $20/mo
Review BoardReview BoardBest mixed-media review · $12/mo
GiteeGiteeBest code and project tools · CN¥24.92/mo
TortoiseSVNTortoiseSVNBest for Windows SVN · Free
Helix CoreHelix CoreBest for complex projects · $39/mo
01Compared at a glance
| Tool | Score | From | Free plan | Trial |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| BitbucketBitbucket | 7.0 | $3.65/mo | Yes | — |
| ForgejoForgejo | 7.6 | Free | Yes | — |
| GiteaGitea | 7.5 | $9.50/mo | Yes | 30 days |
| GitKrakenGitKraken | 7.2 | €4/mo | Yes | 14 days |
| ForkFork | 7.3 | Custom | No | Yes |
| TowerTower | 7.4 | $5.75/mo | No | 30 days |
| Gerrit Code ReviewGerrit Code Review | 6.8 | Free | Yes | — |
| Sublime MergeSublime Merge | 7.5 | $6.25/mo | No | Yes |
| KaleidoscopeKaleidoscope | 7.8 | $8/mo | No | 7 days |
| GraphiteGraphite | 6.5 | $20/mo | Yes | — |
| Review BoardReview Board | 6.7 | $12/mo | Yes | 30 days |
| GiteeGitee | 6.8 | CN¥24.92/mo | Yes | 30 days |
| TortoiseSVNTortoiseSVN | 7.2 | Free | Yes | — |
| Helix CoreHelix Core | 5.3 | $39/mo | Yes | — |
02The picks, in detail
- Best overallBitbucketBitbucket
Bitbucket is our best overall pick for teams that want private repositories and already use Jira. The published pricing lists a free plan and a starting price of $3.65, making it an affordable place to start. Configurable merge checks are another plus. Pipeline costs and mixed switching sentiment keep it from being an automatic choice for teams outside the Atlassian orbit.
What works
- Free plan supports up to five users
- Unlimited public and private repositories on Free
- Jira work-item connection for code and CI/CD
What doesn't
- Free plan includes just 50 build minutes
- Extra 1,000 build minutes cost $10 per month
- One Reddit thread reports $15 per concurrent runner slot
- Best free self-hostedForgejoForgejo
Forgejo is a strong fit for teams that want control over their Git hosting and put Free Software first. It has a free plan, with no starting price listed. The trade-off is operational: your team needs to be comfortable managing servers. If you want a hosted, low-maintenance setup, look elsewhere; if self-hosting is part of the goal, Forgejo deserves a close look.
What works
- Project commits to remain Free Software
- Self-hosting gives you control of the server
- Homepage describes a low server profile
What doesn't
- No commercial plans or billing are published
- Self-hosting means managing your own server
- Support options are not published on the vendor's site
- Best self-hosted Git
GiteaGitea
Gitea suits small groups that can manage their own Git hosting and want private repositories or GitHub Actions-compatible workflows. It has a free plan, with paid plans listed from $9.50. That price and feature mix make it worth comparing with Forgejo before you switch: Gitea is a solid platform, but Forgejo may better fit teams prioritizing community appeal and Free Software.
What works
- Free self-hosted plan lists unlimited users and repositories
- Combines Git hosting, reviews, projects, packages and CI/CD
- Gitea Actions supports GitHub Actions-compatible workflows
What doesn't
- Annual Enterprise billing requires a one-year commitment
- Cloud pricing lists $19 monthly or $79.17 monthly equivalent billed annually
- Reddit users flag extra setup work for CI runners
- Best visual Git toolkitGitKrakenGitKraken
GitKraken is a good match for developers who prefer visual Git workflows, IDE Git history and tools for coordinating AI-agent work. The published pricing lists a free entry point and plans from $4, but private-repository work starts at Pro. That qualification matters: teams choosing it for free private-repo use should check the plan details before committing.
What works
- Free Community plan for open-source and solo developers
- Visual client displays branches, commits, and conflicts
- GitLens adds code history and authorship in IDEs
What doesn't
- Community is limited to local repos and public remotes
- Pro rises to €8 per seat/month after year one
- Paid plan prices are billed annually
- Best one-time purchaseForkFork
Fork is for developers who want a desktop Git client with visual conflict resolution, especially when one user works across three machines. The listed license is a $59.99 one-time purchase, which may suit buyers wary of recurring fees. The published information leaves a few questions unanswered, so check the current license terms before making it your team standard.
What works
- One-time $59.99 license
- Personal and commercial use included
- License covers up to three machines
What doesn't
- License is for one user
- Evaluation duration is not published
- Support details are not published
- Best paid Git clientTowerTower
Tower is a capable fit for Mac and Windows users who prefer visual controls and need pull request workflows. Its listed starting price is $5.75, and the case is strongest for teams comfortable paying annually. If you are comparing desktop clients, weigh that recurring commitment against Fork’s $59.99 one-time license and the needs of your team.
What works
- Visual drag-and-drop Git actions
- Undo changes with Cmd+Z
- Pull requests created inside Tower
What doesn't
- No free plan
- Monthly billing prices aren’t published
- Basic is limited to one user
- Best open-source reviewGerrit Code ReviewGerrit Code Review
Gerrit Code Review is worth considering when your team wants open-source code review, patchset-based workflows and configurable approvals. The published details list a free plan and no starting price. The catch is fit: Gerrit’s review workflow may not suit every Git team. Check whether its approval process matches how your developers already review and merge changes.
What works
- Open source with no software licensing fees
- Patchset reviews support iterative code feedback
- Configurable approvals and fine-grained permissions
What doesn't
- No monthly or annual price is published
- Pricing information is marked low confidence
- No seat or usage limits are stated
- Best desktop diff reviewSublime MergeSublime Merge
Sublime Merge fits developers who review diffs often, prefer desktop Git clients and want organization-owned seats. Its listed personal license costs $99. Before buying, check the update window and how it affects your team’s upgrade plans. The published details do not list a starting price, so confirm current licensing terms rather than treating the personal license as the full team cost.
What works
- Stages files, hunks and individual lines
- Splits hunks into multiple changes
- Searches commits, authors, paths and contents
What doesn't
- No free plan is listed
- Personal license costs $99 upfront
- Personal price includes only three years of updates
- Best diff and merge toolKaleidoscopeKaleidoscope
Kaleidoscope is a specialist pick for resolving merge conflicts, comparing commits and reviewing file history, with centralized license management for teams. The published pricing lists plans from $8. That is easier to justify if diff and merge work is a regular part of the job; for occasional comparisons, the price may be harder to defend.
What works
- Three-way merge shows a base revision and both sides of a conflict
- Reviews changes between commits and tracks working-copy changes live
- Compares text, images, folders, and Git changes
What doesn't
- No free plan
- Monthly Individual billing costs $14
- The $8 Individual price requires yearly billing
- Best stacked PR workflowGraphiteGraphite
Graphite is aimed at teams adopting stacked pull requests, GitHub-based AI review workflows or a merge queue. Its listed starting point is $20 and it has a free plan, but monthly prices are unpublished and free AI features are limited. Those gaps make it harder to compare total cost up front. Check the paid plan details before standardizing on it.
What works
- Combines reviews, chat, PR inbox, and merging
- Supports sequenced stacked pull requests
- Merge Queue is included in Team
What doesn't
- Hobby AI Reviews and Chat are limited
- Paid monthly prices are not published
- Starter is $20 per user monthly, billed annually
- Best mixed-media reviewReview BoardReview Board
Review Board stands out for teams reviewing both code and documents, projects that need image-diff workflows, and organizations that want on-prem deployment. The published pricing lists a free plan and starts at $12. Before switching, check the integration caps and seat limits: the seat limits are unpublished, which makes it difficult to estimate the cost for a larger team.
What works
- Reviews code, documents and images
- Image diffs include split and onion-skin views
- Reviewers can open, resolve and reopen issues
What doesn't
- Community seat and usage limits are unpublished
- SaaS seat limits are unpublished
- Basic SaaS allows up to two integrations
- Best code and project toolsGiteeGitee
Gitee may fit small teams that want a free code-hosting plan alongside project workflows, or organizations considering private deployment. The published pricing lists a free plan and a starting price of $24.92. That combination is worth weighing against Gitee’s limits and trust trade-offs; teams should confirm both are acceptable before moving repositories or project work.
What works
- Free plan supports up to 5 members
- Includes code review and project collaboration tools
- Free tier includes 12,000 build minutes yearly
What doesn't
- Free repositories capped at 0.5GB each
- Free files capped at 50MB
- Paid plans require at least 5 users
- Best for Windows SVNTortoiseSVNTortoiseSVN
TortoiseSVN is a sensible choice for Windows users already working with SVN, commercial teams that need a free SVN client, and teams using Visual Studio or issue trackers. The published details list a free plan and no starting price. It is not a general-purpose version-control pick, so teams standardizing on Git should look elsewhere.
What works
- Free to use, including in commercial environments
- Integrates with the Windows shell
- Does not require the SVN command-line client
What doesn't
- Built for Apache Subversion, not Git
- Windows shell extension, not a cross-platform client
- No paid plans or billing prices are published
- Best for complex projectsHelix CoreHelix Core
Helix Core is positioned for global development and design teams, complex projects and game developers considering Perforce. The published pricing lists a free plan and starts at $39, but higher-tier costs are unclear. User-reported client friction is another reason to investigate carefully. It may suit specialized project needs, but the price and usability questions weaken its value for most buyers.
What works
- Free plan supports up to 5 users
- Free plan includes up to 20 workspaces
- Cloud includes 64GiB of storage
What doesn't
- Cloud costs $39 per user monthly
- Scale and Platform prices are quote-based
- Annual pricing for Free and Cloud is not published
03How we chose
We weigh published pricing, plan limits, product documentation and Reddit sentiment when comparing version control and code review tools. We focus on what affects a buying decision: where a tool fits in a workflow, what a plan includes, and what a team should verify before switching. We do not treat missing details as proof that a feature or limit does not exist; we mark information as unpublished when sources do not state it. This guide does not rely on hands-on testing, benchmarks or screenshots.
04Choose around your team's workflow, not a feature checklist
Start by mapping how code moves through your team: where repositories live, how contributors propose changes, who reviews them, and how approved work reaches production. Then shortlist tools that fit that process. The tools on this page include different approaches to version control and code review, so compare the jobs you need done rather than assuming every option is a direct substitute.
Ask who needs access, whether external contributors are involved, and what your team needs to keep from its current setup. Check the documentation for supported workflows and integrations, and confirm any requirements that could block adoption. A long feature list is not useful if the tool does not fit your review habits or repository structure.
05Compare total cost and switching work before you commit
A listed price is only one part of the cost. Check which plan includes the features your team needs, whether limits apply to users or repositories, and whether the pricing page publishes those limits clearly. If a detail is missing, treat it as a question for the vendor—not as an included feature.
Estimate the work of moving repositories, review history, permissions and team habits. Documentation can help establish what a tool supports, while user discussions can flag issues worth investigating; neither should replace checking your own requirements. Before choosing, write down the must-haves, the plan that appears to cover them, and the open questions. That makes it easier to compare Bitbucket, Review Board, Graphite and the other listed options without letting a low starting price decide for you.
Questions people ask
What should we compare when choosing version control software?
Compare how each option fits your repository and review workflow, what its documentation says about required capabilities, and what the published pricing includes. Check plan limits and any details the vendor does not publish. Also consider the work of moving repositories, permissions and team habits.
Is code review software the same as version control software?
Not necessarily. The category covers tools for managing source changes and reviewing contributions, but products can serve different parts of that process. Check each tool's documentation and pricing rather than assuming it replaces every system your team already uses.
How can we compare plans when limits are not published?
Record the missing detail as an open question and ask the vendor to confirm it for the plan you are considering. Do not assume an unpublished limit is unlimited or included. Compare only confirmed costs and capabilities when estimating what a switch will require.
What should we plan before switching version control tools?
Inventory repositories, access rules, review practices and any workflows your team depends on. Then consult the documentation for the tools under consideration and verify what can move or must be rebuilt. Include migration effort and team training in the decision, not just subscription price.