Continue.dev vs Sourcegraph Cody
Continue.dev and Sourcegraph Cody are both popular tools in the Code Generation space. Continue.dev uses a open-source model starting at Free, while Sourcegraph Cody is freemium from Free. Both offer a free tier to get started. Below we break down features, pricing, strengths, and weaknesses to help you decide which tool fits your workflow best.
Last updated: March 2026
Quick Verdict
Choose Continue.dev if you want the open-source ai code assistant for any llm and any ide.. Continue.dev's biggest strengths include complete flexibility in llm provider choice and fully open-source with active community. Choose Sourcegraph Cody if you prefer ai coding assistant with unmatched codebase context.. Key advantages include unmatched codebase context across large mono-repos and powered by sourcegraph's enterprise code intelligence. It's also rated higher (4.2 vs 3.9).
The open-source AI code assistant for any LLM and any IDE.
| Continue.dev | Sourcegraph Cody | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Free Tier | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing Model | Open-source | Freemium |
| Rating | ★ 3.9 | ★ 4.2 |
| Categories | Code Generation, AI Code Editors | Code Generation |
| Key Features | 6 features | 6 features |
| Feature | Continue.dev | Sourcegraph Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Tab autocomplete with any LLM provider | ✓ | — |
| In-editor chat with codebase context | ✓ | — |
| Support for local models via Ollama and LM Studio | ✓ | — |
| VS Code and JetBrains integration | ✓ | — |
| Customizable slash commands and context providers | ✓ | — |
| Fully open-source and self-hostable | ✓ | — |
| Codebase-wide context from Sourcegraph's code graph | — | ✓ |
| Multi-repo search and understanding | — | ✓ |
| AI chat with deep code context | — | ✓ |
| Code generation and autocomplete | — | ✓ |
| Support for VS Code and JetBrains | — | ✓ |
| Custom commands and prompt templates | — | ✓ |
Continue.dev
Pros
- + Complete flexibility in LLM provider choice
- + Fully open-source with active community
- + Works with local models for total privacy
- + Highly customizable through config files
Cons
- − Requires more setup than turnkey solutions like Copilot
- − Quality depends heavily on which LLM you connect
- − Less polished UX compared to commercial alternatives
Sourcegraph Cody
Pros
- + Unmatched codebase context across large mono-repos
- + Powered by Sourcegraph's enterprise code intelligence
- + Supports multiple LLM providers (Claude, GPT-4, etc.)
- + Excellent for understanding unfamiliar codebases
Cons
- − Full power requires Sourcegraph enterprise deployment
- − Autocomplete speed lags behind Copilot and Codeium
- − Smaller community than mainstream alternatives
The Bottom Line
Choose Continue.dev if: you want the open-source ai code assistant for any llm and any ide.. It's completely free to use. Keep in mind: requires more setup than turnkey solutions like copilot.
Choose Sourcegraph Cody if: you prefer ai coding assistant with unmatched codebase context.. It's completely free to use. It holds a higher user rating (4.2 vs 3.9). Keep in mind: full power requires sourcegraph enterprise deployment.
Both tools compete in the Code Generation space. The right choice depends on your specific needs, team size, and budget.
GitHub Copilot
Windsurf
Claude Code
TabNine
