Last Updated on August 7, 2025 by Arnav Sharma
Terraform or Bicep, both tools offer unique advantages for managing Azure resources through Infrastructure as Code (IaC), but they also have their distinct differences that make them suitable for various use cases. This blog post compares their features, usability, and how they integrate with Azure services to help you decide which is the better tool for your Azure deployments.
Terraform: The HashiCorp Solution for Azure Infrastructure
Terraform, developed by HashiCorp, is an open-source tool that enables you to define and provision a cloud infrastructure using a high-level configuration language. It is not specifically tied to Azure, as it supports multiple cloud providers, offering a versatile option for managing cross-cloud resources. Terraform’s language, HCL (HashiCorp Configuration Language), is declarative, allowing users to specify what resources they want, with Terraform figuring out how to create them.
Key Feature with Bicep Templates of Terraform in Azure
- Multi-cloud Compatibility: Terraform supports not only Azure but also other cloud providers, allowing for multi-cloud infrastructure management.
- Terraform State: Terraform tracks the state of your infrastructure and manages changes with precision, preventing conflicts during deployment.
- Modules and Ecosystem: Terraform’s extensive module system enables reusability of code across different projects, backed by a large community and ecosystem.
- Azure Provider: Through the AzureRM Terraform provider, it integrates deeply with Azure, managing a wide range of Azure resources efficiently.
- Terraform Cloud and CLI: For teams, Terraform Cloud offers collaborative features, while the CLI tool streamlines operations like
terraform init,terraform apply, and others for individual users.
Bicep: The Native Azure IaC Solution
Bicep is a domain-specific language developed by Microsoft, designed specifically for Azure resource deployment. It acts as an abstraction over Azure Resource Manager (ARM) templates, aiming to simplify the authoring experience and make it more accessible, essentially promoting the use of ARM template code. Bicep’s syntax is more concise compared to ARM templates, making it easier to read and write.
Key Features of Bicep in Azure
- Designed Specifically for Azure: Bicep is optimized for Azure, providing a seamless integration with Azure services and deployments.
- Declarative Syntax: Bicep uses a declarative syntax similar to Terraform, but it’s more streamlined and focused on Azure resources.
- Bicep CLI and Extensions: The Bicep CLI tool and Visual Studio Code extension enhance the development experience, offering features like autocompletion and integrated deployment capabilities, essentially working with Bicep in a more intuitive way.
- Direct Integration with Azure DevOps and Pipelines: Bicep files can be directly used in Azure DevOps pipelines for continuous integration and deployment (CI/CD), aligning closely with Azure’s native tools and services.
- Transpilation to ARM Templates: Bicep code is transpiled into ARM templates before deployment, ensuring compatibility with existing Azure Resource Manager infrastructure.
Comparing Terraform and Bicep
When comparing Terraform and Bicep, several factors come into play, including ease of use, community support, and flexibility.
- Ease of Use: Bicep’s syntax is arguably simpler and more intuitive for those specifically working within Azure. However, Terraform’s HCL is also user-friendly and benefits from being applicable across different cloud providers, unlike Bicep which is like ARM but specific to Azure Cloud.
- Community and Ecosystem: Terraform enjoys a broader community support due to its multi-cloud capabilities, with a wealth of modules and integrations available. Bicep, while newer, is rapidly growing its community, focusing on Azure-specific scenarios and resembling ARM template code.
- Flexibility and Scope: Terraform offers greater flexibility for managing multi-cloud environments, making it suitable for complex deployments across Azure, AWS, Google Cloud, and more. Bicep, on the other hand, offers a more streamlined approach for users fully invested in Azure infrastructure.
Differences Between Terraform and Bicep
| Feature | Terraform | Bicep |
|---|---|---|
| Cloud Support | Multi-cloud (Azure, AWS, Google Cloud, etc.) | Azure-specific |
| Language | HashiCorp Configuration Language (HCL) | Simplified, domain-specific language |
| State Management in Microsoft Azure | Maintains state files to manage resources | Relies on Azure Resource Manager |
| Community Support for Bicep in Azure Portal | Extensive, with a broad range of modules available | Growing, with a focus on Azure-specific modules |
| Integration | Works with multiple CI/CD tools, requires setup for Azure DevOps | Deep integration with Azure DevOps and pipelines |
| Ecosystem | Large, supports a wide array of providers and services | Focused primarily on Azure services and features |
| Tooling with Bicep Extension | Terraform CLI and Cloud for collaboration within the broader scope of Azure Cloud | Bicep CLI, Visual Studio Code extension |
| Deployment Target | Any supported cloud provider | Azure resources exclusively |
Similarities Between Terraform and Bicep
| Feature | Terraform & Bicep |
|---|---|
| Infrastructure as Code | Both enable defining cloud resources using code |
| Declarative Syntax | Use declarative languages to specify desired state, akin to crafting a Bicep template in Microsoft Azure. |
| Integration with Azure | Both can manage Azure resources effectively |
| Version Control Friendly | Code-based approaches suitable for Git and similar systems |
| Automation Capabilities | Support automated deployments via CI/CD pipelines |
| Customization | Allow for custom configurations of cloud resources |
| Resource Management | Enable provisioning, updating, and deleting of cloud resources |
| Developer Experience | Enhanced by tools like Visual Studio Code, providing extensions and support for syntax highlighting, autocompletion, etc. |