Augment Code vs Roo Code
Compare Augment Code and Roo Code by workflow, pricing, privacy, model support, and best use cases.
Augment Code
Choose Augment Code when the main problem is applying AI to large, real-world codebases without forcing developers to abandon their current IDEs. It is less attractive as a cheap personal autocomplete tool, but strong for teams that value deep context, cloud agents, code review, automation, and enterprise controls.
Roo Code
Choose Roo Code when you want a powerful, open-source VS Code agent with modes, MCP, provider flexibility, local-model options, and deep customization. Choose a hosted AI IDE or CLI agent instead if you want simpler billing, a more polished all-in-one editor, or a terminal-only Git workflow.
Key Differences
Workflow
Augment Code is an enterprise-focused AI coding platform for teams working in large repositories, existing IDEs, terminals, and automated engineering workflows.
Roo Code is a powerful open-source VS Code coding agent for developers who want model choice, deep customization, local control, and multi-step agentic workflows inside their editor.
Pricing
paid
open-source
compare.fields.localModels
No
Yes
BYOK
No
Yes
compare.fields.openSource
No
Yes
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Augment Code | Roo Code |
|---|---|---|
| Primary workflow | Augment Code is an enterprise-focused AI coding platform for teams working in large repositories, existing IDEs, terminals, and automated engineering workflows. | Roo Code is a powerful open-source VS Code coding agent for developers who want model choice, deep customization, local control, and multi-step agentic workflows inside their editor. |
| Type | code-assistant | extension |
| Editor base | VS Code | VS Code |
| Pricing model | paid | open-source |
| Starting price | $100 | $0 |
| Free plan | No | Yes |
| Open source | No | Yes |
| Local models | No | Yes |
| BYOK | No | Yes |
| Platforms | VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Vim, Neovim, CLI, Browser-based Cosmos cloud agent platform, GitHub, Slack, Linear | VS Code, VS Code-compatible editors, macOS, Windows, Linux, Local development environments, Roomote cloud agent workflows |
| Models | Claude Fable 5, Claude Haiku 4.5, Claude Opus 4.5, Claude Opus 4.6, Claude Opus 4.7, Claude Sonnet 4.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, Gemini 3.1 Pro, GPT-5.1, GPT-5.2, GPT-5.4, GPT-5.5, Kimi K2.6, Prism | Anthropic, OpenAI, OpenRouter, Requesty, Google Gemini, Google Vertex AI, AWS Bedrock, MiniMax, Cerebras, Moonshot AI, Chutes AI, Ollama, LM Studio, OpenAI-compatible providers |
| Enterprise features | SSO, OIDC, SCIM, SOC 2 Type II, Security reports, CMEK, ISO 42001 compliance, SIEM integration, Data residency options, Granular access controls, Comprehensive audit trails, Custom usage, Custom top-ups, Unlimited users, Multi-region compute, Custom size compute, Unlimited concurrent sessions, Dedicated support, Usage analytics, Advanced code review analytics, User allowlists, Multi-org GitHub support, Unlimited seats and repositories for enterprise code review | Open-source self-managed usage, Custom modes for team roles, .roorules project guidance, Skills for reusable workflows, MCP integrations, Local model option, BYOK provider control, Semantic codebase indexing, Roomote cloud-agent workflow for Slack, GitHub, logs, tickets, and PR handoff |
| Best for | Enterprise engineering teams, Large monorepos, Production refactors, Repository-scale debugging, Teams that want AI agents inside existing IDEs, Teams using JetBrains who do not want to switch to a VS Code fork, Cloud agent automation, AI-assisted code review, Migration and modernization projects, Incident investigation and security remediation workflows | VS Code users who want an open-source AI coding agent, Developers who want provider choice and BYOK control, Multi-file refactoring, Debugging and test repair, Architecture planning with dedicated modes, Custom workflow automation, MCP-connected development tasks, Local model experiments, Large codebases that benefit from semantic indexing, Teams that want project-specific rules and custom agent personas |
| Not best for | Solo developers looking for the cheapest autocomplete tool, Users who want a full standalone AI IDE replacement, Teams requiring fully local model execution, Workflows that need BYOK model routing as a core documented feature, Projects where usage-based AI billing is unacceptable, Users whose main need is simple line-by-line code completion on a low-cost plan | Users who want a fully managed fixed-price AI IDE, Developers whose main need is inline autocomplete, Non-technical users looking for prompt-to-app builders, Teams that cannot allow agentic tools to run terminal commands, Users who do not want to manage API keys or provider billing, Workflows that require enterprise governance out of the box without custom setup |
Use Case Winners
Both Augment Code and Roo Code have comparable signals here.
Roo Code supports local model workflows.
Augment Code lists more team or enterprise controls.
Both Augment Code and Roo Code have comparable signals here.
Roo Code supports more model/provider options or BYOK-style workflows.
Roo Code is marked as open source.
Pricing Comparison
Augment Code
- Business$100 / month
Flat monthly plan for up to 50 seats with $100/month of usage included across LLM, Context Engine, and Cosmos compute.
- EnterpriseCustom
Custom usage, unlimited users, advanced security, SSO/OIDC/SCIM, compliance options, multi-region compute, and dedicated support.
Roo Code
- Roo Code Extension$0
Free and open-source VS Code extension. Users pay only for the model provider or infrastructure they choose.
- Bring Your Own API KeyUsage-based
Use external inference providers such as Anthropic, OpenAI, OpenRouter, Requesty, Google, and others; costs depend on provider token pricing.
- Local Models$0
Use local models through supported setups such as Ollama or LM Studio; actual cost depends on local hardware.
- Codebase IndexingUsage-based
Optional semantic indexing may require embedding API usage and a Qdrant vector database; cost depends on repository size.
- Roomote Cloud Agent$899 / month
Cloud agent product made by the creators of Roo Code; priced per parallel Roomote after a 7-day trial with included token allowance.
Privacy & Security
Augment Code
Augment states that paid plans do not allow AI training on customer data. The platform processes codebase context, prompts, model requests, repository metadata, tool calls, and cloud-agent session data to provide its Context Engine, IDE clients, CLI, Cosmos, and automation features. Enterprise buyers should review the Trust Center, data residency, CMEK, audit trail, SIEM, and access-control options before using it with regulated or highly confidential code.
Roo Code
Roo Code runs locally inside the developer’s VS Code environment, but prompts, file context, terminal output, MCP tool results, embeddings, and generated edits may be sent to whichever model or embedding provider the user configures. Local-model setups reduce external data exposure, while BYOK setups inherit the privacy and retention terms of the selected provider. Users should avoid exposing secrets, credentials, production data, customer data, private keys, or sensitive terminal output, and should be especially cautious with auto-approval, web browsing, MCP servers, and untrusted repositories.
Choose Augment Code if...
- Enterprise engineering teams
- Large monorepos
- Production refactors
- Repository-scale debugging
- Teams that want AI agents inside existing IDEs
Choose Roo Code if...
- VS Code users who want an open-source AI coding agent
- Developers who want provider choice and BYOK control
- Multi-file refactoring
- Debugging and test repair
- Architecture planning with dedicated modes
Avoid Augment Code if...
- Solo developers looking for the cheapest autocomplete tool
- Users who want a full standalone AI IDE replacement
- Teams requiring fully local model execution
- Workflows that need BYOK model routing as a core documented feature
- Projects where usage-based AI billing is unacceptable
Avoid Roo Code if...
- Users who want a fully managed fixed-price AI IDE
- Developers whose main need is inline autocomplete
- Non-technical users looking for prompt-to-app builders
- Teams that cannot allow agentic tools to run terminal commands
- Users who do not want to manage API keys or provider billing