Bicep vs Terraform: Which IaC Tool is Best for Azure Infrastructure?

Infrastructure as Code is a modern approach to provisioning and managing cloud resources with declarative configuration files in place of manual processes or point-and-click interfaces. Using IaC, infrastructure elements, such as virtual machines, networks, and databases are defined using the code and version control along with automation and CI/CS pipelines. 

This helps shift the teams to: 

• Reduce configuration drift
• Improve repeatability and consistency
• Automate deployments
• Collaborate more effectively across development and operations

Therefore, tools like Terraform and Bicep are two popular options for implementing IaC, especially in cloud-native environments.

In this guide, we shall explore the differences between Bicep Vs Terraform and how to select the best fit for your business. Both differ in terms of language design, multi-cloud capabilities, and ecosystem support, which makes it essential to understand the best use cases of the two. 

What Is Bicep?

Bicep is one of the domain specific languages that was developed by Microsoft for Azure resources. It is designed to streamline the authoring experience for Azure Resource Manager templates. 

Bicep is mainly an abstraction over JSON based ARM templates, since it is easier to read, write, and maintain, without sacrificing the capabilities of the underlying Azure platform. 

Key Features:

• Native to Azure: Built and maintained by Microsoft specifically for Azure.
• Simplified Syntax: More readable than ARM templates, with support for variables, modules, and loops.
• No State Management: Relies on Azure Resource Manager to track infrastructure state.
• Fully Declarative: Uses a declarative syntax similar to Terraform, focused on defining what to deploy, not how.

Pros:

• Deep integration with Azure principles, services, and other resources. 
• No hidden costs and fully backed by Microsoft. 
• It is easier to maintain than the JSON ARM templates. 
• Azure manages the states instead of state files, which in turn reduces the complexity. 

Cons:

• One of the biggest cons is the fact that it is only suitable for multi-cloud or hybrid cloud use cases. 
• It is definitely a new kid on the block, which is why it is not as mature as Terraform. 
• It is still working on its third-party integrations and plugins. 

What Is Terraform?

Terraform is another open-source Infrastructure as Code tool, which was developed by HashiCorp to define and provision infrastructure across multiple different cloud providers using a high level configuration language, HCL. 

Terraform supports AWS Azure, Google Cloud, Kubernetes, and many other providers, making it a super powerful multi-cloud IaC solution. 

Key Features:

• Multi-Cloud Support: Manage infrastructure across different cloud platforms.
• State Management: Maintains a state file to track infrastructure changes.
• Modular Design: Supports reusable modules and version-controlled configurations.
• Large Ecosystem: Strong community and provider support.

Pros:

• Terraform is the ideal solution for multi-cloud and hybrid cloud environments. 
• Well-documented due to a large community and plenty of modules. 
• Helps manage drift due to powerful state tracking and change planning. 
• Terraform is extensible with hundreds of community and official providers available. 

Cons:

• Terraform can be slightly complex for team environments. 
• HCL and Terraform come with a learning curve, which can take time to master. 
• Recent Terraform license change has caused concern for the open-source community. 

Related Article: Terraform Cheatsheet: Only Guide You Will Ever Need

Bicep vs Terraform: Key Differences

Feature	Bicep	Terraform
Language Syntax & Learning Curve	Simple, concise DSL tailored for Azure; easier for ARM users to pick up	Uses HCL (HashiCorp Configuration Language); steeper learning curve for beginners
Azure Integration & Native Support	Built and maintained by Microsoft for Azure; supports all ARM resources	Strong Azure support via provider plugin; not native to Azure
Multi-Cloud Capabilities	Azure-only; not designed for other cloud providers	True multi-cloud support (AWS, GCP, Azure, more)
State Management	No separate state file; relies on Azure Resource Manager for state	Requires and manages a state file (local or remote)
Tooling & Ecosystem	Growing ecosystem; strong integration with Azure CLI, VS Code	Large ecosystem with many community and enterprise tools/modules
Error Handling & Debugging	Basic error messages; relies on Azure’s deployment feedback	Detailed plan/apply output; better tooling for diagnosing issues

When to Use Bicep vs Terraform

Choosing between Bicep vs Terraform is completely dependent on your cloud strategy and infrastructure beads. It also largely depends on the team’s technical knowledge and expertise. 

Choosing between Bicep vs Terraform depends on your cloud strategy, team expertise, and infrastructure needs.

Use Bicep When:

• You are working only with Azure and no other provider. 
• Your team is more inclined to use ARM templates. 
• You need tight integrations with Azure tools, such as Azure CLI, Azure DevOps. 
• You need to simplify JSON ARM templates with cleaner syntax. 
• You don’t want to manage state files manually. 

Use Terraform When:

• You manage infrastructure across many different cloud providers, such as AWS, GCP, Azure, and more. 
• You need a mature tool, supported by a big community. 
• You want fine control over state tracking and drift detection.
• You’re working in environments that benefit from reusable, versioned modules.
• You have already invested in the Terraform ecosystem. 

Can Bicep and Terraform Be Used Together?

The straight answer to this is yes! 

Now that we have compared Bicep vs Terraform in all possible scenarios. Let’s discuss a common use case as well. In hybrid environments, where the team permits, both Bicep and Terraform can be used together. However, using the two together may introduce state and drift challenges. Therefore, it is best to clearly document tool boundaries. 

Now, here are a few use cases where you could employ both. 

• Use Bicep for Azure-specific workloads and Terraform for other cloud platforms. 
• Terraform can invoke ARM templates using external modules, but this is more of a workaround rather than native integration. 
• Terraform can reference Azure resources created by Bicep if they exist in the same subscription.

Example: Using Bicep and Terraform in a Hybrid Cloud Workflow

Use Case:

A company uses Azure for internal services and AWS for customer-facing applications. They want to maintain IaC across both but keep tools aligned with team expertise.

Approach:

• Use Bicep to provision Azure resources such as:
  • Virtual Networks
  • Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS)
  • Azure Key Vault
• Use Terraform to manage:
  • AWS infrastructure (e.g., EC2, RDS, S3)
  • Cloudflare DNS and CDN
  • Monitoring with Datadog

How They Integrate:

• Both Bicep and Terraform templates are stored in separate folders in a version-controlled repository.
• A CI/CD pipeline (e.g., GitHub Actions or Azure DevOps) orchestrates deployments:
  • Azure jobs run az deployment sub create with Bicep files.
  • AWS jobs run terraform apply for the Terraform code.

Terraform may use a data source to read Azure resources created by Bicep if needed:
data “azurerm_resource_group” “example” {

  name = “rg-created-by-bicep”

}

Conclusion: What Should You Choose Between Bicep Vs Terraform For Your Azure Projects?

Both Bicep and Terraform are insanely powerful Infrastructure as Code tools, but serve different goals. If you are fully immersed in the Azure ecosystem, then Bicep should be the way to go for you. If you are more inclined towards multiple cloud providers, then Terraform is the one. 

However, you can always use a combination of the two and find your own way! 

Frequently Asked Questions