StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Build Automation
  4. Infrastructure Build Tools
  5. AWS CloudFormation vs Cloud Foundry

AWS CloudFormation vs Cloud Foundry

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Stacks1.6K
Followers1.3K
Votes88
Cloud Foundry
Cloud Foundry
Stacks188
Followers346
Votes5

AWS CloudFormation vs Cloud Foundry: What are the differences?

Introduction:

AWS CloudFormation and Cloud Foundry are both popular cloud computing platforms that enable organizations to deploy and manage their applications and infrastructure in the cloud. While they share some similarities, there are key differences between the two platforms in terms of their focus, scope, and underlying technologies.

  1. Scope of Management: AWS CloudFormation is primarily focused on managing the infrastructure resources and configuration required for deploying and running applications in the cloud. It provides a way to create and manage a collection of related AWS resources, such as EC2 instances, databases, load balancers, and networking components, all as a single unit called a stack. On the other hand, Cloud Foundry is an open-source platform-as-a-service (PaaS) framework that offers a higher level of abstraction, enabling developers to focus more on the application logic rather than the underlying infrastructure. It provides a runtime environment that handles the deployment, scaling, and management of applications, abstracting away the complexities of infrastructure management.

  2. Multi-Cloud Support: AWS CloudFormation is specific to the Amazon Web Services (AWS) ecosystem and is tightly integrated with other AWS services and features. It enables users to orchestrate the creation and management of AWS resources using declarative templates written in YAML or JSON. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, is cloud-agnostic and supports multiple cloud providers, including AWS, Google Cloud Platform, and Microsoft Azure, among others. It provides a consistent platform experience across different cloud environments, allowing applications to be deployed and managed seamlessly across various clouds without being locked into a specific cloud provider.

  3. Deployment Approach: AWS CloudFormation follows an infrastructure-as-code (IaC) approach, where the desired configuration of the infrastructure is specified using a template, which is then used to manage the creation, modification, and deletion of resources in a predictable and automated manner. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, takes a different approach by abstracting away the infrastructure details and focusing on providing a platform for deploying and running applications. It follows a more developer-centric approach, where applications are packaged as self-contained artifacts and deployed using the cf push command, which automatically handles the routing, scaling, and lifecycle management of the applications.

  4. Community and Ecosystem: AWS CloudFormation benefits from being part of the extensive AWS ecosystem, which offers a wide range of services, tools, and integrations that can be used in conjunction with CloudFormation to build and manage cloud applications. It has a large and active community that provides support, documentation, and a repository of pre-defined templates for different use cases. Cloud Foundry, being an open-source project, also has a vibrant community and ecosystem that contributes to its development and provides a wealth of resources, including buildpacks, service brokers, and marketplace offerings, extending the capabilities of the platform.

  5. Granularity of Control: AWS CloudFormation provides fine-grained control over the resources and configuration settings, allowing users to specify the exact details of how the resources should be provisioned and configured. It supports conditional logic, parameterization, and resource dependencies, enabling users to define complex deployment scenarios. Cloud Foundry, on the other hand, abstracts away the lower-level infrastructure details and provides a higher level of abstraction, which may limit the control and flexibility for users who require more granular control over the deployment and configuration of their applications.

  6. Integration with Existing Workflows: AWS CloudFormation integrates well with other AWS services and can be seamlessly integrated into existing CI/CD pipelines and automation workflows. It supports integration with AWS CodePipeline, AWS CodeCommit, and other DevOps tools, enabling users to automate the entire application lifecycle from development to production. Cloud Foundry also integrates with various CI/CD tools and provides a robust set of APIs and CLI commands for automating tasks, making it easy to incorporate the platform into existing workflows.

In summary, AWS CloudFormation is a service focused on managing the infrastructure resources and configuration in the AWS ecosystem, adopting an infrastructure-as-code approach, while Cloud Foundry is a cloud-agnostic open-source platform-as-a-service framework that simplifies application deployment and management, abstracting away the infrastructure details. Cloud Foundry offers multi-cloud support, a higher level of abstraction, and a vibrant community, while AWS CloudFormation provides fine-grained control, deep integration with AWS services, and native support for AWS resources.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on AWS CloudFormation, Cloud Foundry

Timothy
Timothy

SRE

Mar 20, 2020

Decided

I personally am not a huge fan of vendor lock in for multiple reasons:

  • I've seen cost saving moves to the cloud end up costing a fortune and trapping companies due to over utilization of cloud specific features.
  • I've seen S3 failures nearly take down half the internet.
  • I've seen companies get stuck in the cloud because they aren't built cloud agnostic.

I choose to use terraform for my cloud provisioning for these reasons:

  • It's cloud agnostic so I can use it no matter where I am.
  • It isn't difficult to use and uses a relatively easy to read language.
  • It tests infrastructure before running it, and enables me to see and keep changes up to date.
  • It runs from the same CLI I do most of my CM work from.
385k views385k
Comments
Daniel
Daniel

May 4, 2020

Decided

Because Pulumi uses real programming languages, you can actually write abstractions for your infrastructure code, which is incredibly empowering. You still 'describe' your desired state, but by having a programming language at your fingers, you can factor out patterns, and package it up for easier consumption.

426k views426k
Comments
Sergey
Sergey

Contractor at Adaptive

Apr 17, 2020

Decided

Overview

We use Terraform to manage AWS cloud environment for the project. It is pretty complex, largely static, security-focused, and constantly evolving.

Terraform provides descriptive (declarative) way of defining the target configuration, where it can work out the dependencies between configuration elements and apply differences without re-provisioning the entire cloud stack.

Advantages

Terraform is vendor-neutral in a way that it is using a common configuration language (HCL) with plugins (providers) for multiple cloud and service providers.

Terraform keeps track of the previous state of the deployment and applies incremental changes, resulting in faster deployment times.

Terraform allows us to share reusable modules between projects. We have built an impressive library of modules internally, which makes it very easy to assemble a new project from pre-fabricated building blocks.

Disadvantages

Software is imperfect, and Terraform is no exception. Occasionally we hit annoying bugs that we have to work around. The interaction with any underlying APIs is encapsulated inside 3rd party Terraform providers, and any bug fixes or new features require a provider release. Some providers have very poor coverage of the underlying APIs.

Terraform is not great for managing highly dynamic parts of cloud environments. That part is better delegated to other tools or scripts.

Terraform state may go out of sync with the target environment or with the source configuration, which often results in painful reconciliation.

426k views426k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

AWS CloudFormation
AWS CloudFormation
Cloud Foundry
Cloud Foundry

You can use AWS CloudFormation’s sample templates or create your own templates to describe the AWS resources, and any associated dependencies or runtime parameters, required to run your application. You don’t need to figure out the order in which AWS services need to be provisioned or the subtleties of how to make those dependencies work.

Cloud Foundry is an open platform as a service (PaaS) that provides a choice of clouds, developer frameworks, and application services. Cloud Foundry makes it faster and easier to build, test, deploy, and scale applications.

AWS CloudFormation comes with the following ready-to-run sample templates: WordPress (blog),Tracks (project tracking), Gollum (wiki used by GitHub), Drupal (content management), Joomla (content management), Insoshi (social apps), Redmine (project mgmt);No Need to Reinvent the Wheel – A template can be used repeatedly to create identical copies of the same stack (or to use as a foundation to start a new stack);Transparent and Open – Templates are simple JSON formatted text files that can be placed under your normal source control mechanisms, stored in private or public locations such as Amazon S3 and exchanged via email.;Declarative and Flexible – To create the infrastructure you want, you enumerate what AWS resources, configuration values and interconnections you need in a template and then let AWS CloudFormation do the rest with a few simple clicks in the AWS Management Console, via the command line tools or by calling the APIs.
Application and services centric lifecycle API;High performance dynamic routing;Buildpack support;Data and web services brokers;Linux Container management;Role Based Access and Teams;Active application health management;Standards based user authentication and authorization;Integrated real time logging API;Multi-provider ecosystem
Statistics
Stacks
1.6K
Stacks
188
Followers
1.3K
Followers
346
Votes
88
Votes
5
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 43
    Automates infrastructure deployments
  • 21
    Declarative infrastructure and deployment
  • 13
    No more clicking around
  • 3
    Infrastructure as code
  • 3
    Atomic
Cons
  • 4
    Brittle
  • 2
    No RBAC and policies in templates
Pros
  • 2
    Perfectly aligned with springboot
  • 1
    Free distributed tracing (zipkin)
  • 1
    Free service discovery (Eureka)
  • 1
    Application health management
Integrations
No integrations available
VMware vSphere
VMware vSphere
Logentries
Logentries
Amazon EC2
Amazon EC2
OpenStack
OpenStack
Papertrail
Papertrail
Amazon VPC
Amazon VPC
Splunk Cloud
Splunk Cloud
Sumo Logic
Sumo Logic

What are some alternatives to AWS CloudFormation, Cloud Foundry?

Heroku

Heroku

Heroku is a cloud application platform – a new way of building and deploying web apps. Heroku lets app developers spend 100% of their time on their application code, not managing servers, deployment, ongoing operations, or scaling.

Clever Cloud

Clever Cloud

Clever Cloud is a polyglot cloud application platform. The service helps developers to build applications with many languages and services, with auto-scaling features and a true pay-as-you-go pricing model.

Google App Engine

Google App Engine

Google has a reputation for highly reliable, high performance infrastructure. With App Engine you can take advantage of the 10 years of knowledge Google has in running massively scalable, performance driven systems. App Engine applications are easy to build, easy to maintain, and easy to scale as your traffic and data storage needs grow.

Red Hat OpenShift

Red Hat OpenShift

OpenShift is Red Hat's Cloud Computing Platform as a Service (PaaS) offering. OpenShift is an application platform in the cloud where application developers and teams can build, test, deploy, and run their applications.

AWS Elastic Beanstalk

AWS Elastic Beanstalk

Once you upload your application, Elastic Beanstalk automatically handles the deployment details of capacity provisioning, load balancing, auto-scaling, and application health monitoring.

Render

Render

Render is a unified platform to build and run all your apps and websites with free SSL, a global CDN, private networks and auto deploys from Git.

Hasura

Hasura

An open source GraphQL engine that deploys instant, realtime GraphQL APIs on any Postgres database.

Cloud 66

Cloud 66

Cloud 66 gives you everything you need to build, deploy and maintain your applications on any cloud, without the headache of dealing with "server stuff". Frameworks: Ruby on Rails, Node.js, Jamstack, Laravel, GoLang, and more.

Jelastic

Jelastic

Jelastic is a Multi-Cloud DevOps PaaS for ISVs, telcos, service providers and enterprises needing to speed up development, reduce cost of IT infrastructure, improve uptime and security.

Dokku

Dokku

It is an extensible, open source Platform as a Service that runs on a single server of your choice. It helps you build and manage the lifecycle of applications from building to scaling.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

Bootstrap
Materialize

Bootstrap vs Materialize

Laravel
Django

Django vs Laravel vs Node.js

Bootstrap
Foundation

Bootstrap vs Foundation vs Material UI

Node.js
Spring Boot

Node.js vs Spring-Boot