We use optional analytics to understand visits and advertising measurement to see what leads to signups. Choose what you allow. Privacy policy
Your browser sends a Global Privacy Control signal, so advertising measurement is off unless you turn it on here.
COMPARE PRIVATE REGISTRIES
Compare PrivateNPM with hosted registries, source-platform registries and self-hosted options. Start with package formats, who needs access and who will operate the service, then compare the complete cost.
These comparisons are written by the PrivateNPM team. Each includes reasons to choose the other provider, official sources, a pricing model and a migration checklist. They evaluate workflows rather than rank every registry by one subscription price.
Choose by the packages you distribute and the people who install them. CloudRepo's unlimited users and repositories can suit a broad engineering team. PrivateNPM is a candidate when customer access, recipient keys and a customer portal are central to delivery.
Artifactory is a stronger fit when a universal repository is part of your build and release infrastructure. PrivateNPM is worth evaluating when the job is to publish a few supported formats and control which customers can download them.
Packagecloud deserves consideration when the same team distributes application packages and operating-system packages. PrivateNPM is a candidate when recipient access to npm, Python or file artifacts is the central workflow.
Do not choose on the assumption that only PrivateNPM can issue customer download credentials. Evaluate package restrictions, cross-registry access, the recipient experience and the formats you distribute. Cloudsmith supports a much wider artifact ecosystem.
npm private packages are a natural starting point for a JavaScript team already using npm accounts and organization teams. PrivateNPM is worth evaluating when customers need separate download credentials or your delivery includes Python packages and files.
GitHub Packages is a good candidate for teams whose publishers and consumers already work within GitHub. Evaluate PrivateNPM when distributing to external customers would otherwise require them to manage GitHub credentials and package permissions.
Verdaccio is an excellent candidate for local development, package testing and teams that want control of their registry infrastructure. A managed service is worth evaluating when running that infrastructure is not part of the work you want your team to own.
GitLab is a natural choice when package producers and consumers already operate in GitLab projects. PrivateNPM is worth evaluating when recipients should receive package access independently of the project and group structure of your source platform.
CodeArtifact is a strong candidate for teams already managing build identities and package access in AWS. PrivateNPM is worth testing when customers need to install packages without adopting your AWS authentication workflow.
Nexus Repository is a stronger candidate when your organization needs a repository platform across many ecosystems or a specific deployment model. PrivateNPM is worth considering for supported package formats where managed recipient delivery is the main requirement.
Use the same package formats, storage, downloads, seats and access requirements for each provider. Include existing subscriptions, free-tier eligibility and the work of operating a self-hosted service. Treat customer installs separately from CI jobs; their credentials and costs can differ.
Plan self-hosting Try the PrivateNPM workflow See PrivateNPM plan limits
