Continue vs Sourcegraph Cody
Auto-updated comparison · last refreshed September 3, 2026
TL;DR
| Continue | Sourcegraph Cody | |
|---|---|---|
| Type | vscode-extension | extension |
| Vendor | open source | Sourcegraph |
| Pricing | Free tier (OSS extension, BYO API keys) | Free tier · Pro $9/month · Enterprise $19/user |
| Autocomplete | Yes | Yes |
| Agent mode | Yes | Yes |
| MCP support | Yes | No |
| Local models | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hosted | Yes | Yes |
| Codebase indexing | Yes | Yes |
| Team features | Yes | Yes |
Where Continue wins
- fully OSS
- config-file driven
- local model support
Where Sourcegraph Cody wins
- best-in-class codebase context via Sourcegraph search
- bring your own key
- self-hosted
Weaknesses
Continue: config-heavy; slower to add new features than Cursor
Sourcegraph Cody: most value if you already use Sourcegraph search; onboarding is longer than Cursor
Best for
Pick Continue if you are teams that need OSS auditable AI tooling, or local LLM users.
Pick Sourcegraph Cody if you are large monorepos, or enterprises already on Sourcegraph, or BYOK power users.
FAQ
Is Continue more expensive than Sourcegraph Cody?
Free tier (OSS extension, BYO API keys) vs Free tier · Pro $9/month · Enterprise $19/user. Compare the Pro tiers first if you're a solo dev; Business/Enterprise only matters for teams.
Do Continue and Sourcegraph Cody use the same AI models?
Continue supports: any via API. Sourcegraph Cody supports: claude-sonnet-4-6, claude-opus-4-7, gpt-5, gemini-2.5-pro, custom-via-byok. Most modern tools default to Claude Sonnet 4.6 in 2026.
Can I use both?
Yes. They don't conflict at the file level. Some devs use one for autocomplete and one for agent work.
Related comparisons
- Continue vs Cursor
- Continue vs Windsurf
- Continue vs Claude Code
- Continue vs GitHub Copilot
- Continue vs Aider