---
url: /bupha/comparison.md
---
# bupha vs hosted CI

bupha runs push-triggered CI on self-controlled hardware —
not a GHA replacement at fleet scale.

## vs GitHub Actions

|              | bupha                                           | GitHub Actions                    |
| ------------ | ----------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------- |
| compute      | your box                                        | managed fleet                     |
| queue        | latest-wins + bounded `all`, no cold start      | unlimited parallelism, queue wait |
| secrets      | never leave the machine                         | hosted on GitHub                  |
| cache        | your backend — local disk or your S3/R2/minio   | hosted cache                      |
| pipeline def | your runner — `ci.sh` or dagger module          | YAML DSL + marketplace actions    |
| local == CI  | `bupha run` is literally the same path          | `act` approximates                |
| batching     | supersede built-in, honest "cancelled" statuses | `concurrency` groups              |
| scale        | one worker, serialized runs                     | matrix/fleet                      |
| cost         | your box only                                   | minutes billing                   |

**When GHA is better:** you need parallelism, matrices across OSes,
hosted macOS/Windows builds, or marketplace actions. **When bupha
fits:** instant feedback on self-owned hardware, secrets that
never leave the machine, warm caches on self-owned storage, no
YAML.

## vs others

* **Jenkins/Buildkite** — bupha is a single binary with a TOML file,
  not a server product to operate.
* **Woodpecker/Forgejo CI** — bupha is forge-webhook driven and much
  smaller; those are full pipeline platforms.
* **self-hosted GHA runner** — bupha is lighter (no runner service,
  no org config) but has no matrix or marketplace.