You are a DevOps engineer in an AWS-standardized organization. Your CTO wants Sitecore running on EC2 by next quarter. Every Google result points toward Azure. Your Sitecore partner says "Azure is native." Your AWS account team says "we can run anything." Both are telling the truth, and that is the problem.
The short answer: Azure is the path of least resistance for Sitecore XP because Sitecore is built on .NET and was designed with Azure technologies at its core. AWS is a fully viable production host, especially if your organization is already AWS-standardized or you want the managed Marketplace option. Neither platform disqualifies you. The right choice depends on where your infrastructure already lives and how much manual architecture work you are willing to absorb.
Azure is the native platform for Sitecore XP with first-class App Service integration, ARM templates from Sitecore partners, and the majority of community expertise on the Azure side. AWS is production-ready and offers a managed Marketplace listing for Sitecore XM, but requires more manual architecture work. If your org runs on AWS and does not want to introduce a second cloud, AWS is a defensible choice. If you are starting fresh or your partner ecosystem is Azure-heavy, Azure wins by default.
At-a-Glance: Sitecore on AWS vs Azure
The table below compares the two platforms across the criteria that matter most when deciding where to host Sitecore XP or Sitecore XM.
| Criteria | Azure | AWS |
|---|---|---|
| Hosting fit | Native (.NET, App Service, SQL Managed Instance) | Viable (EC2, RDS SQL Server, ALB/ASG) |
| Deployment model | PaaS (App Service) or IaaS (VM); ARM templates available from partners | IaaS (EC2) primary; PaaS possible but requires more manual setup |
| Managed options | Sitecore Managed Cloud (quote-based); partner-managed App Service | Sitecore XM Managed Service on AWS Marketplace ($52,800/yr list price) |
| Sitecore licensing | Quote-based; contact Sitecore directly | Quote-based; contact Sitecore directly |
| Infrastructure cost model | Pay-as-you-go; see Azure App Service pricing | Pay-as-you-go; Windows EC2 instances higher than Linux; see AWS EC2 pricing |
| Community and partner expertise | Heavy; most Sitecore MVPs and partners are Azure-first | Growing; smaller but active AWS Sitecore community |
| Sitecore official documentation | Listed as cloud configuration option; Azure-first reference architectures | Listed as cloud configuration option; associated with "low cost" in Sitecore docs |
| Best for | New projects, Azure-standardized orgs, partner-heavy deployments | AWS-standardized orgs, teams avoiding multi-cloud, Marketplace managed option |
Why Sitecore and Azure Are a Natural Pair
Azure is the native cloud for Sitecore XP. Sitecore 9 was built with a cloud-first mindset and was designed around Azure technologies, and that lineage carries forward into current versions. In practice, this means the reference architectures, ARM deployment templates, and the bulk of Sitecore partner tooling all target Azure App Service, Azure SQL Database, and Azure SQL Managed Instance.
For a .NET-based platform like Sitecore, Azure App Service is the natural PaaS fit: managed Windows hosting, built-in deployment slots for blue-green releases, integrated Application Insights, and scale-out that does not require you to configure an Auto Scaling Group manually. Azure SQL Managed Instance supports the SQL Server features Sitecore depends on (SQL Agent, CLR, linked servers) without forcing you to manage VM-level patching.
- ARM templates for Sitecore are available from Sitecore implementation partners, reducing deployment time.
- Most Sitecore MVPs, community resources, and certified implementation partners operate primarily on Azure.
- Built-in scale-out via App Service Plans and Azure SQL elastic pools aligns with Sitecore's multi-instance content delivery architecture.
- Sitecore's own official documentation lists Azure as a cloud configuration option with globally available locations.
The practical implication: if you have no existing cloud preference, choosing Azure means more tooling works out of the box, your implementation partner likely has production experience on the platform, and you spend less time adapting reference architectures.
Running Sitecore on AWS: What It Takes
AWS can run Sitecore XP in production, but it requires more manual architecture work than Azure. The standard IaaS path uses EC2 Windows instances, RDS for SQL Server, an Application Load Balancer, and an Auto Scaling Group for the content delivery tier.
The gaps you need to fill on AWS that Azure handles more natively include: configuring SQL Server features required by Sitecore (some of which are restricted in RDS), managing Windows patching at the EC2 level, and wiring up session state providers that Sitecore's Azure path abstracts away. None of these are blockers for a competent cloud team, but they represent real engineering hours that Azure deployments avoid through managed services built for .NET workloads.
- EC2 + RDS SQL Server + ALB/ASG is the proven AWS self-managed architecture for Sitecore.
- High availability requires manual configuration of ASGs, health checks, and session affinity at the ALB layer.
- AWS Windows EC2 instances carry a higher per-hour cost than Linux equivalents due to the Windows license; see AWS EC2 pricing for current rates.
- Sitecore's official documentation notes AWS as a cloud configuration option and associates it with "low cost," likely referencing raw infrastructure pricing relative to managed alternatives.
For AWS-standardized organizations with experienced .NET engineers on the platform, these are manageable tradeoffs. For teams new to AWS or without deep Sitecore AWS experience, the integration work adds meaningful risk to project timelines.
Sitecore XM Cloud and Managed Offerings
Sitecore XM Cloud is Sitecore's SaaS content management offering and changes the hosting question entirely: the platform is managed by Sitecore, and you do not choose the underlying cloud provider for the CMS layer. As of mid-2026, the exact cloud infrastructure behind XM Cloud is evolving; verify the current deployment model on sitecore.com before making architectural commitments based on it.
For self-managed or partner-managed deployments, two managed options are worth knowing:
- Sitecore Managed Cloud (Azure-based): Sitecore or its partners manage the Azure infrastructure. Pricing is quote-based; contact Sitecore directly.
- Sitecore XM Managed Service on AWS Marketplace: An official managed listing on the AWS Marketplace at a list price of $52,800 per year. This is the most concrete public price anchor for running Sitecore on AWS with managed operations included. Verify current pricing on the listing before procurement.
The AWS Marketplace managed option is notable because it gives AWS-standardized organizations a path to Sitecore XM with managed operations, consolidated billing through AWS, and no requirement to introduce Azure into their stack.
Cost Comparison: AWS vs Azure for Sitecore
Comparing infrastructure costs for Sitecore on AWS vs Azure is not a simple table exercise because the dominant cost is Sitecore platform licensing, which is quote-based and not publicly listed. Contact Sitecore directly for XP or XM license pricing. Infrastructure is a secondary cost relative to licensing for most enterprise deployments.
For the infrastructure layer:
- Azure App Service pricing is pay-as-you-go per vCPU-hour and GB-hour. Current rates are on the Azure App Service pricing page. No single flat price applies because tier, region, and reserved vs. on-demand billing vary significantly.
- AWS EC2 pricing is pay-as-you-go per instance-hour. Windows instances are priced higher than Linux due to OS licensing. Current rates are on the AWS EC2 pricing page. Reserved Instances reduce on-demand rates for stable workloads.
- The Sitecore XM Managed Service on AWS Marketplace lists at $52,800/year, which bundles managed operations but excludes platform licensing and underlying infrastructure.
- Sitecore Managed Cloud on Azure is quote-based.
In practice, the infrastructure cost difference between AWS and Azure for a Sitecore deployment is smaller than the engineering and operational cost difference introduced by the platform's Azure-native design. Teams that choose AWS should factor in the additional engineering hours required for architecture, HA configuration, and ongoing operations.
It Depends: When to Pick Azure vs AWS for Sitecore
- Your organization has no strong cloud preference or is already Azure-standardized.
- You are working with a Sitecore implementation partner, who is almost certainly Azure-first.
- You want the shortest path to production using existing Sitecore ARM templates and App Service PaaS.
- Your team has .NET developers but limited AWS operational experience.
- You are running other Microsoft workloads (Active Directory, SharePoint, SQL Server) already on Azure.
- Compliance requirements map cleanly to Azure regions or certifications your organization already uses.
- Your organization is AWS-standardized and wants to avoid introducing a second cloud provider.
- You have existing AWS contracts, enterprise discounts, or consolidated billing requirements.
- Your team has strong AWS operational skills and can absorb the additional Sitecore integration work.
- You want the AWS Marketplace managed option ($52,800/yr) for consolidated procurement and managed operations.
- You are already running .NET applications successfully on EC2 or Elastic Beanstalk and have the runbooks to match.
- Your compliance requirements (e.g., GovCloud, specific AWS regions) are a hard constraint.
Three questions to cut through the decision: (1) Where does your existing infrastructure already live? (2) Does your Sitecore implementation partner have AWS production references, or only Azure? (3) Is your team willing to own the additional integration engineering that running Sitecore on AWS requires?
Final Verdict
WINNER: DRAW (Azure = native fit; AWS = viable for AWS-standardized organizations)
Azure is the native platform for Sitecore XP and XM. It was built into Sitecore's architecture from version 9 onward, the partner ecosystem is Azure-first, and the PaaS path (App Service, SQL Managed Instance) reduces operational overhead compared to any IaaS alternative. For teams without a strong existing cloud allegiance, Azure is the default correct answer.
AWS is not a wrong answer. It is a production-proven platform for Sitecore with an official managed offering on the Marketplace at a published price of $52,800/year. Organizations already standardized on AWS, with the engineering capacity to handle more manual architecture work, have every reason to stay on their existing platform rather than introducing Azure overhead.
This is not a case where one platform is broken for Sitecore. It is a case where one platform (Azure) requires less friction, and the other (AWS) requires more deliberate engineering. Match your choice to your organization's cloud posture, not to what any search result tells you is canonical.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Sitecore only supported on Azure?
No. Sitecore officially lists both Azure and AWS as supported cloud configuration options in its documentation. Azure is the native fit due to Sitecore's .NET and Azure-first design, but AWS is a supported production platform used by organizations with existing AWS infrastructure.
What is the cost of running Sitecore on AWS vs Azure?
Sitecore platform licensing is quote-based on both platforms; contact Sitecore directly. Infrastructure pricing is pay-as-you-go on both AWS and Azure. The AWS Marketplace managed option lists at $52,800/year and excludes licensing and base infrastructure costs.
What is the Sitecore XM Managed Service on AWS Marketplace?
It is an official managed listing on the AWS Marketplace for Sitecore XM at a list price of $52,800/year as of the time of writing. It bundles managed operations and allows procurement through AWS consolidated billing. It does not include Sitecore platform licensing or underlying EC2 and RDS infrastructure costs.
Why do most Sitecore partners recommend Azure?
Because Sitecore was architected with Azure technologies from version 9 onward. Most Sitecore MVPs, certified partners, and implementation teams have built their tooling, ARM templates, and operational runbooks around Azure App Service and Azure SQL. AWS expertise in the Sitecore partner community exists but is significantly smaller.
Can Sitecore XM Cloud run on AWS?
Sitecore XM Cloud is a SaaS offering where Sitecore manages the infrastructure. As an end user, you do not select the underlying cloud provider. The exact infrastructure platform for XM Cloud is evolving; verify the current deployment model on sitecore.com before making architectural decisions based on it.
What SQL Server options are available for Sitecore on AWS?
You can use RDS for SQL Server or run SQL Server on EC2 Windows instances. RDS is the managed option but has feature restrictions that may affect certain Sitecore configurations. Validate your required Sitecore version against the RDS feature matrix. Running SQL Server on EC2 gives full feature parity at the cost of managing patching and HA yourself.
Does running Sitecore on AWS require more work than Azure?
Yes, typically. Azure App Service and Azure SQL Managed Instance handle managed Windows hosting, scale-out, and SQL Server feature compatibility that Sitecore requires with less manual configuration. On AWS, teams must manually configure EC2 Auto Scaling Groups, ALB session affinity, and SQL Server HA, which adds engineering overhead but is achievable with the right team skills.