Continue vs Sourcegraph Cody
Compare Continue and Sourcegraph Cody by workflow, pricing, privacy, model support, and best use cases.
Continue
Choose Continue when model control, open-source extensibility, and repository-defined AI checks matter more than a fully managed AI editor experience.
Sourcegraph Cody
Sourcegraph Cody is strongest when paired with Sourcegraph Enterprise and large-scale code search. It is less suitable as a personal AI coding tool now that Cody Free and Cody Pro have been discontinued.
Key Differences
Workflow
Continue is an open-source AI coding agent and IDE extension ecosystem focused on configurable model access, repository-defined AI checks, and team-controlled coding workflows.
Sourcegraph Cody is an enterprise AI coding assistant focused on codebase-aware chat, code edits, completions, and context retrieval across large multi-repository environments.
Pricing
freemium
enterprise
compare.fields.localModels
Yes
No
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Continue | Sourcegraph Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Primary workflow | Continue is an open-source AI coding agent and IDE extension ecosystem focused on configurable model access, repository-defined AI checks, and team-controlled coding workflows. | Sourcegraph Cody is an enterprise AI coding assistant focused on codebase-aware chat, code edits, completions, and context retrieval across large multi-repository environments. |
| Type | extension | extension |
| Editor base | VS Code | VS Code |
| Pricing model | freemium | enterprise |
| Starting price | $3 | $16000 |
| Free plan | Yes | No |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| Local models | Yes | No |
| BYOK | Yes | Yes |
| Platforms | VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, CLI, GitHub | VS Code, JetBrains IDEs, Visual Studio, Sourcegraph Web, Cody CLI, GitHub, GitLab, Sourcegraph Cloud, Sourcegraph self-hosted |
| Models | Anthropic, OpenAI, Azure, Amazon Bedrock, Ollama, Google Gemini, DeepSeek, Mistral, xAI, Vertex AI, Inception, HuggingFace, Groq, Together AI, DeepInfra, OpenRouter, ClawRouter, Tetrate Agent Router Service, Cohere, NVIDIA, Cloudflare, MiniMax, LM Studio, llama.cpp, LlamaStack, llamafile, SambaNova, Watson x, Sagemaker, Nebius | Claude Opus 4.5, Gemini 3 Pro, GPT-5.1, OpenAI 4.1, OpenAI 4.1-mini, OpenAI 4.1-nano, OpenAI o3, OpenAI o4-mini, Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Preview, Google Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Amazon Bedrock, Azure OpenAI, Google Cloud Vertex AI |
| Enterprise features | Shared private agents, Team agent controls, Gmail/GitHub SSO on Team, SAML or OIDC SSO on Company, BYOK on Company, Commitment, invoicing, and SLA on Company, GitHub PR check integration, Centralized Mission Control management | Sourcegraph Enterprise support, Single-tenant cloud, Self-hosted deployment, Enterprise admin and security controls, SSO and RBAC through Sourcegraph platform, Context Filters, Cody Gateway, Enterprise model selection, Org-wide AI credit pooling, Sourcegraph Code Search integration, MCP Server access, GraphQL and REST APIs, CLI access, 24x5 support with upgrade options |
| Best for | Developers who want AI coding assistance inside VS Code without switching to a full AI-native editor., Teams that want AI review rules stored in the repository and enforced as PR status checks., Organizations that need model flexibility across cloud, local, self-hosted, and gateway providers., Developers building custom coding agents with YAML configuration, rules, prompts, models, and tools., Engineering teams experimenting with AI quality gates before adopting larger autonomous coding systems. | Enterprise teams with large monorepos or multi-repository architectures, Organizations already using Sourcegraph Code Search and code intelligence, Developers who need AI answers grounded in remote repository context, Security-conscious teams that need context filtering and enterprise controls, Teams that want AI assistance inside existing IDEs rather than switching editors |
| Not best for | Users who want a polished all-in-one AI IDE with minimal configuration., Teams that prefer a single vendor-managed model and billing experience., JetBrains-heavy teams that need the IDE plugin to be the primary supported path., Users who do not want token-based billing for hosted model usage., Organizations that are uncomfortable with the current read-only status of the legacy main GitHub repository. | Individual developers looking for a low-cost personal AI coding assistant, Teams that want a standalone AI-native editor, Users looking for a fully autonomous coding agent that takes issues end-to-end, Organizations that do not plan to deploy or buy Sourcegraph Enterprise, Developers who need local model execution as a primary feature |
Use Case Winners
Both Continue and Sourcegraph Cody have comparable signals here.
Continue supports local model workflows.
Sourcegraph Cody lists more team or enterprise controls.
Both Continue and Sourcegraph Cody have comparable signals here.
Continue supports more model/provider options or BYOK-style workflows.
Both Continue and Sourcegraph Cody have comparable signals here.
Pricing Comparison
Continue
- Open-source Extension / CLI$0
Apache-2.0 codebase with VS Code extension, CLI, and JetBrains plugin artifacts available from official channels.
- Starter$3 / million tokens
Pay-as-you-go usage for creating and running agents, integrations, and frontier model credits.
- Team$20 / seat/month
Team management, private shared agents, agent controls, Gmail/GitHub SSO, and $10 credits per seat.
- CompanyCustom
Enterprise plan with SAML or OIDC SSO, BYOK, commitments, invoicing, and SLA.
Sourcegraph Cody
- Sourcegraph EnterpriseFrom $16K
Enterprise platform plan that includes credits for AI features and scales with team size.
- Cody EnterpriseContact sales
Enterprise-supported Cody access for Sourcegraph customers; Cody Free, Cody Pro, and Enterprise Starter Cody access were discontinued in 2025.
- Volume AI CreditsCustom
Additional volume credit buckets are available as add-ons for AI feature usage.
Privacy & Security
Continue
Continue documents anonymous telemetry in the open-source extensions, says it strips personally identifiable information, and provides opt-out controls for IDE extensions and the CLI. Local and offline setups are documented, but privacy also depends on the chosen model provider, GitHub integration, telemetry settings, and any configured data destinations.
Sourcegraph Cody
Cody collects prompts and responses to provide the service, and Sourcegraph documentation says it does not use user data to train models. Sourcegraph AI Terms state that Sourcegraph and partner LLMs do not use customer code to train models, and partner LLMs use zero-retention handling for inputs, outputs, and candidate context when accessed through Sourcegraph Partner LLMs. Enterprise teams should review AI Terms, Context Filters, Cody Gateway, model routing, self-hosting, and codehost permissions before rollout.
Choose Continue if...
- Developers who want AI coding assistance inside VS Code without switching to a full AI-native editor.
- Teams that want AI review rules stored in the repository and enforced as PR status checks.
- Organizations that need model flexibility across cloud, local, self-hosted, and gateway providers.
- Developers building custom coding agents with YAML configuration, rules, prompts, models, and tools.
- Engineering teams experimenting with AI quality gates before adopting larger autonomous coding systems.
Choose Sourcegraph Cody if...
- Enterprise teams with large monorepos or multi-repository architectures
- Organizations already using Sourcegraph Code Search and code intelligence
- Developers who need AI answers grounded in remote repository context
- Security-conscious teams that need context filtering and enterprise controls
- Teams that want AI assistance inside existing IDEs rather than switching editors
Avoid Continue if...
- Users who want a polished all-in-one AI IDE with minimal configuration.
- Teams that prefer a single vendor-managed model and billing experience.
- JetBrains-heavy teams that need the IDE plugin to be the primary supported path.
- Users who do not want token-based billing for hosted model usage.
- Organizations that are uncomfortable with the current read-only status of the legacy main GitHub repository.
Avoid Sourcegraph Cody if...
- Individual developers looking for a low-cost personal AI coding assistant
- Teams that want a standalone AI-native editor
- Users looking for a fully autonomous coding agent that takes issues end-to-end
- Organizations that do not plan to deploy or buy Sourcegraph Enterprise
- Developers who need local model execution as a primary feature