Bitbucket
Mattermost
| Feature | Bitbucket | Mattermost |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free / from $3/mo | Free / from $10/mo |
| Free Plan | ✓ Yes | ✓ Yes |
| Rating | 4.1 / 5 | 4.2 / 5 |
| Best For | atlassian-users, small-teams, enterprise, developers | devops-teams, security-conscious-orgs, government, enterprise |
| Founded | 2008 | 2015 |
| Git Hosting | ✓ | ✗ |
| Pull Requests | ✓ | ✗ |
| Ci Cd Pipelines | ✓ | ✗ |
| Code Review | ✓ | ✗ |
| Branch Permissions | ✓ | ✗ |
| Jira Integration | ✓ | ✗ |
| Messaging | ✗ | ✓ |
| Channels | ✗ | ✓ |
| Playbooks | ✗ | ✓ |
| Integrations | ✗ | ✓ |
| Self Hosting | ✗ | ✓ |
| Compliance | ✗ | ✓ |
✓ Bitbucket Pros
- Free private repos
- Jira integration
- Built-in CI/CD
- Code review tools
✗ Bitbucket Cons
- Slower than GitHub
- UI less polished
- Smaller community
✓ Mattermost Pros
- Self-hostable
- Open source
- DevOps integrations
- Secure
✗ Mattermost Cons
- Smaller ecosystem
- Fewer integrations than Slack
- Self-hosting complexity
The Verdict
Bitbucket is built for atlassian users and small teams, with a focus on git-hosting and pull-requests. Mattermost targets devops teams and security conscious orgs and leads with messaging and channels.
On pricing, Bitbucket is the clear winner for budget-conscious users — starting at $3/mo compared to $10/mo for Mattermost. That $7/mo difference adds up quickly for growing teams.
Both offer free plans, so you can test each with your real workflow before committing to a subscription.
Both tools are a solid fit for enterprise — in those cases, the decision often comes down to workflow style and how your team prefers to organize work.
This is a genuinely close comparison. If you can, sign up for both free trials (where available) and run a one-week test with your actual team tasks before deciding.