244 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
244 lines
6.7 KiB
Markdown
# ArgoCD vs Flux: Comprehensive Comparison (2024-2025)
|
|
|
|
## Current Versions (October 2025)
|
|
|
|
- **ArgoCD**: v3.1.9 (stable), v3.2.0-rc4 (release candidate)
|
|
- **Flux**: v2.7.1 (latest)
|
|
|
|
## Quick Decision Matrix
|
|
|
|
| Criteria | Choose ArgoCD | Choose Flux |
|
|
|----------|---------------|-------------|
|
|
| **Primary Focus** | Developer experience, UI | Platform engineering, modularity |
|
|
| **Team Size** | Medium-large teams | Small teams, platform engineers |
|
|
| **UI Required** | Yes | No (CLI-driven) |
|
|
| **Complexity** | Simpler onboarding | Steeper learning curve |
|
|
| **Customization** | Less modular | Highly modular |
|
|
| **Multi-tenancy** | Built-in with Projects | Manual configuration |
|
|
| **Best For** | Application teams, demos | Infrastructure teams, advanced users |
|
|
|
|
## Key Differences
|
|
|
|
### Architecture
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD**:
|
|
- Monolithic design with integrated components
|
|
- Web UI, API server, application controller in one system
|
|
- Centralized control plane
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- Modular microservices architecture
|
|
- Separate controllers: source, kustomize, helm, notification, image-automation
|
|
- Distributed reconciliation
|
|
|
|
### User Experience
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD**:
|
|
- Rich web UI for visualization and management
|
|
- GUI dashboard for deployment, syncing, troubleshooting
|
|
- Easier onboarding for developers
|
|
- Better for demos and presentations
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- CLI-driven (flux CLI + kubectl)
|
|
- No built-in UI (can integrate with Weave GitOps UI separately)
|
|
- Requires comfort with command-line tools
|
|
- Steeper learning curve
|
|
|
|
### Application Management
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD 3.x**:
|
|
- Application and ApplicationSet CRDs
|
|
- App-of-apps pattern for organizing applications
|
|
- Fine-grained RBAC (new in v3.0)
|
|
- Annotation-based tracking (default in v3.0, changed from labels)
|
|
|
|
**Flux 2.7**:
|
|
- Kustomization and HelmRelease CRDs
|
|
- No built-in grouping mechanism
|
|
- RBAC through Kubernetes RBAC
|
|
- Label-based tracking
|
|
|
|
### Multi-Cluster Support
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD ApplicationSets**:
|
|
- Cluster generator for auto-discovery
|
|
- Matrix generator for cluster x app combinations
|
|
- Hub-and-spoke pattern (one ArgoCD manages multiple clusters)
|
|
- 83% faster deployments vs manual (30min → 5min)
|
|
|
|
**Flux Multi-Tenancy**:
|
|
- Manual cluster configuration
|
|
- Separate Flux installations per cluster or shared
|
|
- More flexible but requires more setup
|
|
- No built-in cluster generator
|
|
|
|
### Secrets Management
|
|
|
|
Both support:
|
|
- Sealed Secrets
|
|
- External Secrets Operator
|
|
- SOPS
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD 3.0 Change**:
|
|
- Now explicitly endorses secrets operators
|
|
- Cautions against config management plugins for secrets
|
|
- Better integration with ESO
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- Native SOPS integration with age encryption
|
|
- Decryption happens in-cluster
|
|
- .sops.yaml configuration support
|
|
|
|
### Progressive Delivery
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD + Argo Rollouts**:
|
|
- Separate project but tight integration
|
|
- Rich UI for visualizing rollouts
|
|
- Supports canary, blue-green, A/B testing
|
|
- Metric analysis with Prometheus, Datadog, etc.
|
|
|
|
**Flux + Flagger**:
|
|
- Flagger as companion project
|
|
- CLI-driven
|
|
- Supports canary, blue-green, A/B testing
|
|
- Metric analysis with Prometheus, Datadog, etc.
|
|
|
|
## Feature Comparison
|
|
|
|
| Feature | ArgoCD 3.x | Flux 2.7 |
|
|
|---------|-----------|----------|
|
|
| **Web UI** | ✅ Built-in | ❌ (3rd party available) |
|
|
| **CLI** | ✅ argocd | ✅ flux |
|
|
| **Git Sources** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
|
| **OCI Artifacts** | ❌ | ✅ (GA in v2.6) |
|
|
| **Helm Support** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
|
| **Kustomize** | ✅ (v5.7.0) | ✅ (v5.7.0) |
|
|
| **Multi-tenancy** | ✅ Projects | Manual |
|
|
| **Image Automation** | ⚠️ Via Image Updater | ✅ GA in v2.7 |
|
|
| **Notifications** | ✅ | ✅ |
|
|
| **RBAC** | ✅ Fine-grained (v3.0) | Kubernetes RBAC |
|
|
| **Progressive Delivery** | Argo Rollouts | Flagger |
|
|
| **Signature Verification** | ⚠️ Limited | ✅ cosign/notation |
|
|
|
|
## Performance & Scale
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD**:
|
|
- Can manage 1000+ applications per instance
|
|
- Better defaults in v3.0 (resource exclusions reduce API load)
|
|
- ApplicationSets reduce management overhead
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- Lighter resource footprint
|
|
- Better for large-scale monorepos
|
|
- Source-watcher (v2.7) improves reconciliation efficiency
|
|
|
|
## Community & Support
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD**:
|
|
- CNCF Graduated project
|
|
- Large community, many contributors
|
|
- Akuity offers commercial support
|
|
- Annual ArgoCon conference
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- CNCF Graduated project
|
|
- Weaveworks shutdown (Feb 2024) but project remains strong
|
|
- Grafana Labs offers Grafana Cloud integration
|
|
- GitOpsCon events
|
|
|
|
## Version 3.0 Changes (ArgoCD)
|
|
|
|
**Breaking Changes**:
|
|
- Annotation-based tracking (default, was labels)
|
|
- RBAC logs enforcement (no longer optional)
|
|
- Removed legacy metrics (argocd_app_sync_status, etc.)
|
|
|
|
**New Features**:
|
|
- Fine-grained RBAC (per-resource permissions)
|
|
- Better defaults (resource exclusions for high-churn objects)
|
|
- Secrets operators endorsement
|
|
|
|
## Version 2.7 Changes (Flux)
|
|
|
|
**New Features**:
|
|
- Image automation GA
|
|
- ExternalArtifact and ArtifactGenerator APIs
|
|
- Source-watcher component
|
|
- OpenTelemetry tracing support
|
|
- CEL expressions for readiness
|
|
|
|
## Migration Considerations
|
|
|
|
### From ArgoCD → Flux
|
|
|
|
**Pros**:
|
|
- Lower resource consumption
|
|
- More modular architecture
|
|
- Better OCI support
|
|
- Native SOPS integration
|
|
|
|
**Cons**:
|
|
- Lose web UI
|
|
- More complex setup
|
|
- Manual multi-tenancy
|
|
|
|
**Effort**: Medium-High (2-4 weeks for large deployment)
|
|
|
|
### From Flux → ArgoCD
|
|
|
|
**Pros**:
|
|
- Gain web UI
|
|
- Easier multi-tenancy
|
|
- ApplicationSets for multi-cluster
|
|
- Better for teams new to GitOps
|
|
|
|
**Cons**:
|
|
- Higher resource consumption
|
|
- Less modular
|
|
- Limited OCI support
|
|
|
|
**Effort**: Medium (1-3 weeks)
|
|
|
|
## Recommendations by Use Case
|
|
|
|
### Choose ArgoCD if:
|
|
- ✅ Developer teams need visibility (UI required)
|
|
- ✅ Managing dozens of applications across teams
|
|
- ✅ Multi-tenancy with Projects model
|
|
- ✅ Fast onboarding is priority
|
|
- ✅ Need built-in RBAC with fine-grained control
|
|
|
|
### Choose Flux if:
|
|
- ✅ Platform engineering focus
|
|
- ✅ Infrastructure-as-code emphasis
|
|
- ✅ Using OCI artifacts extensively
|
|
- ✅ Want modular, composable architecture
|
|
- ✅ Team comfortable with CLI tools
|
|
- ✅ SOPS+age encryption requirement
|
|
|
|
### Use Both if:
|
|
- Different teams have different needs
|
|
- ArgoCD for app teams, Flux for infrastructure
|
|
- Separate concerns (apps vs infrastructure)
|
|
|
|
## Cost Considerations
|
|
|
|
**ArgoCD**:
|
|
- Higher memory/CPU usage (~500MB-1GB per instance)
|
|
- Commercial support available (Akuity)
|
|
|
|
**Flux**:
|
|
- Lower resource footprint (~200-400MB total)
|
|
- Grafana Cloud integration available
|
|
|
|
## Conclusion
|
|
|
|
**2024-2025 Recommendation**:
|
|
- **For most organizations**: Start with ArgoCD for ease of use
|
|
- **For platform teams**: Flux offers more control and modularity
|
|
- **For enterprises**: Consider ArgoCD for UI + Flux for infrastructure
|
|
- Both are production-ready CNCF Graduated projects
|
|
|
|
The choice depends more on team preferences and workflows than technical capability.
|