Incidentally, evaluating an image CDN is my current task at $dayjob. I've been comparing uptimes and, with the caveat that this data is not easy to gather and harder to compare across providers, I just noticed that imgix had twenty-five incidents the past year, mostly "Elevated Rendering Errors". I take it they're a market leader in the image CDN space but that honestly does not inspire confidence in me. Cheaper providers (Imagekit, Sirv) seem to have better reliability.
(Ofc, another caveat is how accurate do they monitor and report, but---short of running customer sentiment analysis---I don't seem to have a choice other than to assume that factor is roughly equal.)
I guess it's a David-to-Goliath comparison but I would just expect Cloudflare to have better reliability than any of them. Plus, as another reply pointed out, brand recognition helps in getting that budget approval.
My company uses Imgix, we're overall pretty happy with it. I'm not sure how we feel about pricing - that's not in my wheelhouse - but it works well for our needs. Our contact there has also been really helpful.
The reliability isn't great though. "Elevated Rendering Errors" almost always is "increased errors rendering uncached derivative images". Basically any image variant - by file and transformation/dimension parameters - that hasn't been viewed recently won't load. So a srcset homepage hero image probably has all size variations a user might see in Imgix's cache, and will render. But on less-traveled parts of our site, photos generally won't load. We're a rather image-heavy site and it's pretty debilitating to the UX when this happens, so it's frustrating that this happens more than the "almost never" rate we'd wish for. FWIW, we've never noticed problems on their end that aren't closely followed by an incident report in their status page, so they're not under-reporting at least.
I haven't use imgix but just had a quick look at the docs. It doesn't seem to have the same ability for you to give your users a way to upload their own images in a secure way? If that's the case then that's a big + for Cloudflare.
In general though, CF just nail every version of what they do so I'd personally go with their version of it even if it's the same.
(Ofc, another caveat is how accurate do they monitor and report, but---short of running customer sentiment analysis---I don't seem to have a choice other than to assume that factor is roughly equal.)
I guess it's a David-to-Goliath comparison but I would just expect Cloudflare to have better reliability than any of them. Plus, as another reply pointed out, brand recognition helps in getting that budget approval.