Azure vs DigitalOcean: A Real-World Cost Comparison for SMBs

If you're running a small or medium-sized business, there's a good chance you're overpaying for cloud infrastructure. The hyperscalers - Azure, AWS, and Google Cloud - are exceptional platforms, but their complexity and pricing often exceed what SMBs actually need.

I recently completed a detailed analysis comparing Azure and DigitalOcean for two common scenarios: hosting a CMS like Umbraco or WordPress, and running a platform with multiple APIs. The results surprised me. Not because DigitalOcean was cheaper (I expected that), but because the savings were so substantial while the reliability remained comparable.

This isn't a theoretical exercise. These are real configurations I've evaluated for client projects, with actual pricing in GBP.

The SMB cloud cost challenge

Most SMBs I work with face the same problem: they've outgrown shared hosting, need production-grade infrastructure, but don't need the enterprise features that drive hyperscaler pricing.

The typical journey looks like this:

1. Start on shared hosting or a simple VPS
2. Grow into needing managed databases, container orchestration, and CDN
3. Choose Azure or AWS because "that's what everyone uses"
4. Discover you're paying for capabilities you'll never touch

DigitalOcean has carved out a niche by focusing on what developers and SMBs actually need: simple, transparent pricing for core infrastructure services. The trade-off is a smaller service portfolio - about 25 services compared to Azure's 200+. For most SMB workloads, that trade-off makes sense.

Scenario 1: CMS hosting (Umbraco or WordPress)

Let's start with a common requirement: hosting a CMS that serves two websites. This is the configuration I used for an Umbraco deployment, but the numbers apply equally to WordPress, Ghost, or any containerised CMS.

The configuration

Both platforms need the same components:

• Container orchestration: Kubernetes cluster for the CMS application
• Database: PostgreSQL with high availability (automatic failover)
• Object storage: For media files and assets
• CDN: For global content delivery
• Container registry: For Docker images

The cost comparison

Component	Azure	DigitalOcean	Difference
Kubernetes control plane	£58/month	Free	-£58
Worker nodes (2 vCPU, 4GB)	£30/month	£19/month	-£11
PostgreSQL HA (2GB cluster)	£47/month	£47/month	£0
Object storage (250GB)	£4/month	£4/month	£0
CDN	£8/month	Free (with Spaces)	-£8
Container registry	£4/month	Free	-£4
Load balancer	-	£9/month	+£9
Monthly total	£118/month	£79/month	-£39
Annual total	£1,416/year	£948/year	-£468

The headline number: 33% savings, or £468 per year.

Where the savings come from

The biggest single saving is the Kubernetes control plane. Azure charges approximately £58/month (about $73) for AKS, while DigitalOcean's DOKS includes the control plane for free. You only pay for worker nodes.

This isn't DigitalOcean cutting corners. Their free control plane is fully managed, with automatic updates and a 99.99% uptime SLA. It's a strategic pricing decision to attract developers away from hyperscalers.

The CDN saving is also notable. Azure CDN is a separate charge. DigitalOcean includes CDN free with their Spaces object storage. For a CMS serving media files, this alone saves £8/month.

What you get for £79/month

This configuration is genuinely production-ready:

• High availability database: PostgreSQL cluster with automatic failover
• Container orchestration: Kubernetes with auto-scaling capability
• Global CDN: Content served from edge locations worldwide
• 2,000GB bandwidth: Per worker node, pooled across the cluster
• Automated backups: Daily database backups with 7-day retention
• UK data residency: London datacenter (LON1) available
• 99.99% uptime SLA: Comparable to Azure's SLA

Scenario 2: Platform with multiple APIs

Now let's look at a more complex scenario: a platform running up to five .NET APIs, a Vue.js frontend, and both PostgreSQL and MongoDB databases.

The configuration

This is the architecture for a SaaS platform or internal tooling:

• Kubernetes cluster: Running 5 containerised .NET APIs
• PostgreSQL: Primary transactional database
• MongoDB: Document storage for flexible schemas
• Static site hosting: Vue.js single-page application
• Secrets management: For API keys and connection strings

The cost comparison

Component	Azure (estimated)	DigitalOcean	Difference
Kubernetes (2 worker nodes)	£90/month	£38/month	-£52
PostgreSQL HA	£50/month	£47/month	-£3
MongoDB (2GB)	£30/month	£24/month	-£6
Static site hosting	£10/month	Free	-£10
Container registry	£4/month	Free	-£4
Secrets management	£5/month	Free (K8s native)	-£5
Load balancer	Included	£9/month	+£9
Object storage	£4/month	£4/month	£0
Monthly total	£180/month	£122/month	-£58
Annual total	£2,160/year	£1,464/year	-£696

The headline number: 32% savings, or £696 per year.

The free static site hosting advantage

DigitalOcean's App Platform includes free hosting for up to three static sites. For a Vue.js or React frontend, this means:

• Direct deployment from Git (push to deploy)
• Automatic SSL certificates
• Global CDN included
• No server management

Azure Static Web Apps has a free tier too, but it's more limited. For production use, you'll typically need the Standard tier at around £10/month.

Secrets management without extra cost

Azure Key Vault is a good service, but it's another line item on your bill. DigitalOcean's approach is simpler: use Kubernetes-native secrets, which are encrypted at rest and included with DOKS at no extra cost.

For teams that need more advanced secrets management (rotation, audit logs, external provider integration), the open-source External Secrets Operator works with DOKS and connects to external vaults if needed.

Hidden cost factors most teams miss

The headline savings are significant, but there are additional factors that often don't appear in initial comparisons.

Egress bandwidth

Cloud egress (data leaving your infrastructure) is where hyperscalers often surprise customers with unexpected bills.

DigitalOcean's approach:

• 2,000GB per worker node per month (pooled across cluster)
• Overage: £0.01/GB
• Inter-service traffic within region: Free
• Container registry pulls: Free

Azure's approach:

• First 5GB free
• Then tiered pricing starting at approximately £0.07/GB
• Can escalate quickly for data-heavy applications

For an API platform serving moderate traffic (say, 500GB/month egress), this difference might add £30-50/month to your Azure bill that doesn't appear in basic pricing calculators.

Container registry

This is a small but illustrative difference:

• Azure Container Registry Basic: £4/month
• DigitalOcean Container Registry: Free (starter tier: 500MB, 1 repo)

For a single-application deployment, DigitalOcean's free tier is sufficient. For larger deployments, their Basic tier (£4/month) offers 5GB storage and 5 repositories.

Pricing predictability

This is harder to quantify but matters for budget planning. DigitalOcean's pricing is straightforward: monthly caps, no surprise bills, all pricing published upfront.

Azure's pricing is more complex. Tiers, reserved capacity options, and consumption-based services mean your bill can vary month-to-month. That's not necessarily bad - it can mean you pay less during quiet periods - but it makes budgeting harder.

When Azure still wins

I'm not suggesting everyone should migrate to DigitalOcean. There are scenarios where Azure is the right choice despite the cost premium.

Deep Microsoft ecosystem integration

If you're running:

• Active Directory for identity management
• .NET applications that depend on Azure-specific services
• Hybrid cloud with on-premises Windows Server
• Power Platform or Dynamics 365 integration

Then Azure's integration advantages outweigh the cost savings. The friction of making these work with a non-Microsoft cloud isn't worth it.

Enterprise compliance requirements

Azure has certifications that DigitalOcean doesn't:

• NHS Data Security and Protection Toolkit
• UK Cyber Essentials
• FedRAMP (US government)
• Industry-specific certifications

If your contracts require specific compliance certifications, check both platforms carefully before deciding.

Advanced services

Azure offers services that DigitalOcean simply doesn't have:

• Azure Cognitive Services: Pre-built AI/ML models
• Azure IoT Hub: Device management at scale
• Azure Synapse: Enterprise data analytics
• Azure Arc: Hybrid cloud management
• Azure Functions: Serverless compute (DigitalOcean has no equivalent)

If your architecture depends on these services, the cost comparison is irrelevant. You need Azure.

Global scale beyond 15 regions

DigitalOcean operates 15 data centres globally. Azure has 60+ regions. If you need:

• Presence in regions DigitalOcean doesn't cover
• Multi-region redundancy across continents
• Local data residency in specific countries

Then Azure's geographic footprint matters more than the cost difference.

Decision framework for SMBs

Based on these comparisons, here's how I'd approach the decision:

Choose DigitalOcean when:

1. Your workloads are containerised - DOKS is excellent for Kubernetes deployments
2. You're using standard databases - PostgreSQL, MySQL, MongoDB, Redis
3. Cost predictability matters - Transparent pricing, no surprise bills
4. You value simplicity - Fewer services means less complexity
5. You're an SMB - 1-50 person technical team
6. UK data residency is sufficient - London datacenter covers UK/EU requirements

Choose Azure when:

1. You're already invested in Microsoft - AD, Office 365, .NET ecosystem
2. You need specific compliance certifications - NHS, Cyber Essentials, etc.
3. You require advanced services - AI/ML, IoT, serverless, analytics
4. You need global presence - 60+ regions vs 15 data centres
5. You're enterprise scale - Complex SLAs, dedicated support contracts
6. Hybrid cloud is a requirement - On-premises integration with Azure Arc

The hybrid approach

Many organisations I work with use both platforms:

• Production workloads on the most cost-effective platform for that workload
• Development/staging on DigitalOcean (significant cost savings for non-production)
• Specific services on Azure where no DigitalOcean equivalent exists

This isn't vendor lock-in avoidance for its own sake. It's practical cost management.

Total cost of ownership calculation

If you're evaluating this decision for your organisation, here's a simple TCO framework:

Annual infrastructure cost

Platform	CMS Scenario	Platform Scenario
Azure	£1,416	£2,160
DigitalOcean	£948	£1,464
Annual savings	£468	£696

Three-year projection

Platform	CMS Scenario	Platform Scenario
Azure	£4,248	£6,480
DigitalOcean	£2,844	£4,392
3-year savings	£1,404	£2,088

Migration cost consideration

These savings assume you're starting fresh or willing to migrate. Migration has real costs:

• Technical effort: 40-80 hours for straightforward migrations
• Risk: Any migration carries some downtime risk
• Learning curve: Team needs to learn new platform

For a new project, the decision is straightforward. For existing workloads, factor in migration effort before committing.

What I'd recommend

For most SMB workloads I see - containerised applications, standard databases, moderate traffic - DigitalOcean offers better value. The 30-40% cost saving is significant, and the platform is genuinely production-ready.

But don't migrate for migration's sake. If you're happy on Azure and the premium isn't hurting you, there are better uses of engineering time than platform migration.

The clearest win is for new projects. If you're starting something today and don't have Azure-specific requirements, default to DigitalOcean. You can always migrate to Azure later if your needs change.

---

Planning a new cloud deployment or reviewing your infrastructure costs? I help organisations make pragmatic architecture decisions that balance cost, reliability, and maintainability. Schedule a consultation to discuss your specific requirements.

---

Getting started with DigitalOcean

If you're ready to try DigitalOcean for your next project, you can sign up using our referral link to receive $200 in credits over 60 days. That's more than enough to thoroughly test a production-equivalent configuration before committing.

Disclosure: The link above is a referral link. If you sign up and spend $25, we receive a small credit. This doesn't affect our recommendations - we've been using and recommending DigitalOcean for SMB workloads since before any referral programme existed.

---

Methodology notes

All pricing in this article is based on:

• DigitalOcean published pricing (January 2026)
• Azure pricing calculator estimates (January 2026)
• GBP conversion at approximately $1 = £0.79

Pricing changes frequently. Verify current rates before making decisions.

The scenarios described are based on real client requirements but generalised for broader applicability. Your specific configuration may vary.