GitHub vs GitLab in 2026: plans, CI minutes, self-hosting and AI compared

GitHub and GitLab both host Git repositories, review code through pull or merge requests, and run CI/CD pipelines. For a small team starting a new project, or a company thinking about moving, the two look interchangeable at first. They are not: the plans are structured differently, the free tiers have different limits, and GitLab offers a self-managed edition on its standard paid plans while GitHub positions its self-hosted product within its Enterprise plan.

This comparison uses the vendors' published pricing pages and documentation, checked on 7 October 2026. We did not benchmark runner speed, run load tests or migrate a production codebase for this article. All prices are in US dollars per user per month as shown on the vendors' sites, before tax.

You will get a plan-by-plan comparison, a side-by-side look at the CI configuration for the same job on both platforms, and a checklist for choosing.

Plans and prices (October 2026)

Two points stand out. First, GitHub's paid tiers are cheaper per seat at list price, but GitHub's pricing page attaches the phrase "for the first 12 months" to both Team and Enterprise prices, so ask GitHub what the renewal price will be before you plan a multi-year budget. Second, GitLab's free tier limits each top-level group to five users, which matters for a growing startup; GitHub's free plan does not show a comparable user cap on its pricing page.

Code review and branch protection

Both platforms centre review on a proposed change: a pull request on GitHub, a merge request on GitLab. The plan differences show up in what you can enforce.

• GitHub Free lists protected branches for public repositories only. Protected branches for private repositories and required reviewers arrive with Team. Enterprise adds the ability to enforce branch and tag protections across an enterprise, SAML single sign-on, and audit log features including an audit log API.
• GitLab includes source code management and CI/CD on Free, with Premium aimed at "scaling organizations" and listing advanced CI/CD and unlimited licensed users. Ultimate adds security policies and its full application security testing suite.

If your team works mainly in private repositories and needs mandatory reviews, budget for GitHub Team at minimum. On GitLab, check the feature comparison for the specific approval rules you need before assuming Free covers them.

CI/CD: the same job on both platforms

Both platforms define pipelines as YAML in the repository. Here is a Node.js test job for pushes and change requests, written for each. The GitHub version uses actions/checkout v7 and actions/setup-node v7, the current major releases on 7 October 2026.

GitHub Actions: .github/workflows/test.yml

name: test

on:
  push:
    branches: [main]
  pull_request:

jobs:
  test:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    steps:
      - uses: actions/checkout@v7
      - uses: actions/setup-node@v7
        with:
          node-version: 24
          cache: npm
      - run: npm ci
      - run: npm test

GitLab CI/CD: .gitlab-ci.yml

stages:
  - test

test:
  stage: test
  image: node:24
  cache:
    key:
      files:
        - package-lock.json
    paths:
      - .npm/
  script:
    - npm ci --cache .npm --prefer-offline
    - npm test
  rules:
    - if: $CI_PIPELINE_SOURCE == "merge_request_event"
    - if: $CI_COMMIT_BRANCH == $CI_DEFAULT_BRANCH

The structure maps closely. GitHub builds a pipeline from reusable actions published on its Marketplace; GitLab builds it from container images, scripts and include templates. GitLab keeps the whole pipeline in one file by default, while GitHub encourages several workflow files. Either approach works; what matters for cost is how many minutes your jobs consume against the plan allowance (2,000 or 3,000 on GitHub Free and Team; 400 or 10,000 on GitLab Free and Premium).

Both platforms also let you register your own runners on your servers, which is the usual answer when the included minutes are not enough or when jobs need special hardware.

Security, compliance and AI

Security tooling is a large part of both vendors' higher tiers.

• GitHub lists Dependabot features on its pricing page and sells GitHub Advanced Security (code security and secret protection) as an add-on. Copilot is not included in any GitHub plan; it is sold separately (Copilot Business is $19 and Copilot Enterprise $39 per granted seat per month, according to GitHub's Copilot plans documentation).
• GitLab includes static application security testing on Free and its broader application security testing and security policies on Ultimate. Its AI features, the Duo Agent Platform, are paid for with GitLab Credits: Premium and Ultimate include a monthly credit amount per user, and Free users can buy credits as an add-on.

For regulated teams, the hosting options matter as much as the scanners. GitHub Enterprise offers data residency on Microsoft Azure regions and GitHub Enterprise Server for running your own instance. GitLab offers a self-managed installation at the same Premium price ($29 per user per month, billed annually) and GitLab Dedicated, a single-tenant SaaS with data residency in a region you choose.

Moving between the platforms

Switching is easier than it used to be, because the core data is plain Git. Cloning with git clone --mirror and pushing to the new remote moves every branch and tag. The harder parts are the records around the code: issues, pull or merge requests, review comments, wiki pages and CI configuration.

GitLab documents a GitHub importer that brings over repositories together with pull requests, issues and comments. Its documentation gives a sense of scale: in GitLab's own test, importing the Kubernetes repository, with about 80,000 pull requests, 45,000 issues and roughly 1.5 million comments, took 76 hours. The same page lists known issues, such as pull request comments created before 2017 arriving in separate threads because of a GitHub API limitation. Read it before you plan a cut-over weekend.

CI configuration never transfers automatically in a useful way. Budget time to rewrite workflows by hand, using the side-by-side example above as a pattern, and run both pipelines in parallel for a week before you switch off the old one. Secrets, deploy keys and webhooks must also be recreated on the new platform; treat this as a chance to rotate them.

Which one fits which team

GitHub is the natural choice when

• Your project is open source or depends heavily on the open-source community, most of which already has GitHub accounts.
• You want the lowest per-seat list price for private repositories with protected branches and required reviewers.
• You plan to buy GitHub Copilot and want it managed alongside your organisation.

GitLab is the natural choice when

• You want one application that covers planning, source control, CI/CD and security scanning, with the pipeline in a single file.
• You need to self-manage the platform without moving to an enterprise contract.
• You want AI usage bundled as credits with the seat rather than a separate subscription.

Decision checklist

1. Count users now and in 12 months. On GitLab Free, five users per top-level group is a hard planning limit.
2. Estimate monthly CI minutes from your current pipelines and compare with each plan's allowance.
3. List the branch rules you must enforce in private repositories and confirm the plan that includes them.
4. Decide whether you need self-hosting or data residency, and get a written quote if so.
5. Ask about renewal prices, especially where a price is marked as an introductory period.
6. Price AI assistance separately: Copilot seats on GitHub, GitLab Credits on GitLab.
7. Check that the integrations you rely on (issue trackers, chat, deployment targets) support your chosen platform.

Summary

GitHub offers lower list prices per seat, a very large community and a separate, well-documented AI product in Copilot. GitLab offers a single application with built-in security testing, a self-managed edition at its standard Premium price and AI credits bundled with paid seats, at a higher price per user. Neither is a wrong choice for a small team. Choose based on user count, CI minutes, hosting requirements and your AI plans, and check both vendors' pricing pages on the day you decide.