Kilo Code vs Roo Code
Compare Kilo Code and Roo Code by workflow, pricing, privacy, model support, and best use cases.
Kilo Code
Choose Kilo Code when openness, model flexibility, BYOK/local options, and cross-surface agent workflows matter more than having one tightly controlled first-party editor experience.
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
Kilo Code positions itself as an open-source, multi-model coding agent that spans IDE extensions, CLI, cloud agents, and team governance.
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.
Feature Comparison
| Feature | Kilo Code | Roo Code |
|---|---|---|
| Primary workflow | Kilo Code positions itself as an open-source, multi-model coding agent that spans IDE extensions, CLI, cloud agents, and team governance. | 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 | extension | extension |
| Editor base | VS Code | VS Code |
| Pricing model | open-source | open-source |
| Starting price | $0 | $0 |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | Yes | Yes |
| Local models | Yes | Yes |
| BYOK | Yes | Yes |
| Platforms | VS Code, Open VSX-compatible editors, JetBrains IDEs, CLI, Cloud Agents, Slack | VS Code, VS Code-compatible editors, macOS, Windows, Linux, Local development environments, Roomote cloud agent workflows |
| Models | Anthropic Claude, OpenAI GPT, Google Gemini, xAI Grok, MiniMax, Z.ai GLM, DeepSeek, Mistral AI, Moonshot AI Kimi, AWS Bedrock, Ollama, LM Studio, Atomic Chat, OpenRouter, OpenAI-compatible providers | 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 | Centralized billing, Usage analytics and reporting, AI adoption score, Shared agent modes, Shared BYOK, Team management, Data privacy controls, Model and provider restrictions, Shared Private Gateway BYOK, Audit logs, SSO, OIDC, and SCIM, SLA commitments, Dedicated support channels | 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 | Developers who want an open-source AI coding agent inside VS Code or JetBrains., Teams that want BYOK, shared modes, usage analytics, and centralized AI cost controls., Power users who switch between IDE and terminal workflows., Developers comparing Roo Code, Cline, Continue, Cursor, and Claude Code., Privacy-conscious workflows that can run capable local models. | 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 | Users who only need lightweight autocomplete with minimal setup., Non-technical users looking for a no-code prompt-to-app builder., Teams that require a single fixed first-party model vendor., Developers without budget or hardware for higher-capability model usage. | 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 Kilo Code and Roo Code have comparable signals here.
Both Kilo Code and Roo Code have comparable signals here.
Kilo Code lists more team or enterprise controls.
Roo Code has stronger frontend or web workflow signals.
Kilo Code supports more model/provider options or BYOK-style workflows.
Both Kilo Code and Roo Code have comparable signals here.
Pricing Comparison
Kilo Code
- Free & Open Source$0 / forever
Core VS Code, JetBrains, and CLI coding agent; AI usage is billed separately or supplied via BYOK/local models.
- Teams$15/user / month
Adds centralized billing, usage analytics, shared modes, shared BYOK, team management, privacy controls, and priority support.
- EnterpriseCustom
Adds model/provider restrictions, private gateway BYOK, audit logs, SSO/OIDC/SCIM, SLA commitments, and dedicated support.
- Auto Free / BYOK / Local$0 / month
Use free routed models where available, bring provider keys, or run local models with Ollama, LM Studio, or Atomic Chat.
- Kilo Gateway$0 + usage / month
Pay-as-you-go hosted inference at provider rates with no AI inference markup.
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
Kilo Code
Kilo Code can use local models through Ollama, LM Studio, and Atomic Chat for workflows where code and prompts stay on the local machine. Hosted Gateway, Cloud Agents, code review, and BYOK routing may send prompts, repository context, or outputs to Kilo infrastructure and/or the selected model provider, so sensitive repositories should be reviewed against provider terms, enterprise controls, and internal policy.
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 Kilo Code if...
- Developers who want an open-source AI coding agent inside VS Code or JetBrains.
- Teams that want BYOK, shared modes, usage analytics, and centralized AI cost controls.
- Power users who switch between IDE and terminal workflows.
- Developers comparing Roo Code, Cline, Continue, Cursor, and Claude Code.
- Privacy-conscious workflows that can run capable local models.
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 Kilo Code if...
- Users who only need lightweight autocomplete with minimal setup.
- Non-technical users looking for a no-code prompt-to-app builder.
- Teams that require a single fixed first-party model vendor.
- Developers without budget or hardware for higher-capability model usage.
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