Continue vs Cody by Sourcegraph
Detailed side-by-side comparison to help you choose the right tool
Continue
🔴DeveloperDeveloper Tools
Open-source AI coding assistant for VS Code and JetBrains — bring any model, any MCP server, and share reusable rules and agents across your team via Continue Hub.
Was this helpful?
Starting Price
FreeCody by Sourcegraph
🔴DeveloperAI Development Assistants
Cody is Sourcegraph's AI coding assistant that uses the Sourcegraph code graph for repo-wide context, ships across VS Code/JetBrains/CLI, and is priced from $0 Free to $16/user/month Pro and Enterprise custom.
Was this helpful?
Starting Price
FreeFeature Comparison
Scroll horizontally to compare details.
Continue - Pros & Cons
Pros
- ✓Open-source assistant for VS Code and JetBrains. This directly supports the primary workflow.
- ✓Bring-your-own-model: Anthropic, OpenAI, Ollama, local, any provider.
- ✓First-class MCP client — any MCP server becomes callable tools.
- ✓Continue Hub for sharing assistants, rules, prompts across a team.
Cons
- ✗At least one tier requires a sales quote, preventing a complete public budget calculation.
- ✗Features and limits can change by plan, billing interval, region, and release; verify current documentation.
- ✗MCP connectivity expands the permission surface and requires narrow scopes, approvals, logs, and credential rotation.
- ✗A representative pilot is necessary because a feature list does not establish reliability or operational fit.
Cody by Sourcegraph - Pros & Cons
Pros
- ✓Deep codebase context via Sourcegraph's Code Search API, pulling relevant symbols and usage patterns across entire codebases for more accurate suggestions
- ✓Multi-LLM support lets users choose between Claude, GPT-4o, Gemini and other models, and enterprise customers can bring their own keys
- ✓Wide IDE coverage including VS Code, JetBrains, Visual Studio (experimental), a web interface in the Sourcegraph platform, and CLI access
- ✓Strong fit for large monorepos and polyrepo enterprise environments where cross-repository context is critical for accurate AI assistance
- ✓Customizable prompts and commands let teams encode standardized workflows (test generation, code review checklists, documentation) as reusable templates
- ✓Enterprise-grade governance with SSO, audit logs, repo permission-aware context, and guardrails for compliance-sensitive industries
Cons
- ✗Full enterprise context features require deploying and configuring Sourcegraph's code intelligence platform, which adds operational overhead
- ✗Free tier usage limits are more restrictive than some competitors like GitHub Copilot's free offering
- ✗Maximum value requires proper codebase indexing setup — context quality scales with indexing completeness
- ✗Smaller extension marketplace compared to GitHub Copilot's broader third-party integration ecosystem
- ✗Amp (the agentic evolution) is a separate product requiring additional onboarding and different workflows from the core Cody experience
- ✗Enterprise deployment complexity can be significant for smaller teams without dedicated DevOps resources
- ✗Learning curve to leverage advanced features like custom prompts, context filters, and @-mentions effectively
Not sure which to pick?
🎯 Take our quiz →Price Drop Alerts
Get notified when AI tools lower their prices
Get weekly AI agent tool insights
Comparisons, new tool launches, and expert recommendations delivered to your inbox.
Ready to Choose?
Read the full reviews to make an informed decision