Cursor vs Sourcegraph Cody
Cursor is an AI-first IDE focused on code generation and autonomous editing, while Sourcegraph Cody leverages Sourcegraph's code graph for unmatched codebase understanding and search across massive repositories. With Sourcegraph sunsetting Cody Free and Pro in 2025 in favor of the new Amp tool, the landscape is shifting for Cody users evaluating alternatives.
| Criteria | Cursor | Cody |
|---|---|---|
| AI Model | GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet | Claude 3.5 Sonnet, GPT-4o, Gemini |
| Pricing | Free / $20/mo Pro / $40/mo Business | Free / $9/mo Pro / $19/mo Enterprise |
| Code Completion | Advanced multi-line, tab completion | Inline autocomplete |
| Chat / Agent | Inline chat, Composer agent, codebase-aware | Context-aware chat, codebase search |
| IDE Support | Cursor IDE (VS Code fork) | VS Code, JetBrains, Web |
| Language Support | All major languages | All major languages |
| Privacy | SOC 2 certified, privacy mode available | Enterprise data controls |
| Customization | Custom rules, .cursorrules files | Custom commands, context filters |
Cursor vs Cody: In-Depth Analysis
Cursor and Cody come from different backgrounds that shape their core strengths. Cursor was built as an AI-first IDE from day one, focused on code generation, multi-file editing, and inline assistance. Cody grew out of Sourcegraph's code search and intelligence platform, making codebase understanding its foundational capability.
Cody's unique advantage is its access to Sourcegraph's code graph. When you ask Cody a question about your codebase, it doesn't just search the current file or a few related files. It searches across your entire codebase, including cross-repository dependencies, documentation, and code patterns. This makes Cody exceptional for answering questions like 'where is this function used?' or 'how does this API work across our services?'
Cursor's strengths lie in the generative side. Composer can autonomously create, edit, and refactor code across multiple files. Background Agents handle parallel tasks. Tab completions are fast and context-aware. For the act of writing code, Cursor is the more capable tool.
The major shift in 2025 was Sourcegraph's decision to sunset Cody Free and Cody Pro plans in June 2025, redirecting individual users to their new tool called Amp, which focuses on agentic workflows and collaboration. Cody Enterprise remains available at $59/user/mo as part of the Sourcegraph platform. This means individual developers can no longer sign up for Cody as a standalone tool.
For enterprise teams, Cody Enterprise offers deep code intelligence integrated with Sourcegraph's search, along with enterprise security, SSO, and compliance features. Cursor Business at $40/mo per user is cheaper but doesn't offer the same depth of codebase-wide intelligence. The ideal enterprise setup might be Cursor for daily coding with Cody Enterprise for code navigation and understanding.
Key Differences Between Cursor and Cody
Core Strength
Cursor excels at code generation and multi-file editing with Composer. Cody excels at codebase understanding and search via Sourcegraph's code graph across repositories.
Availability
Cursor offers Free, Pro ($20/mo), and Business tiers for all users. Cody Free and Pro were sunset in 2025; only Cody Enterprise ($59/user/mo) remains.
IDE Approach
Cursor is a standalone VS Code fork. Cody works as an extension in VS Code, JetBrains, and the web, fitting into your existing workflow.
Cross-Repo Search
Cody can search across multiple repositories and dependencies via Sourcegraph. Cursor's context is limited to the current project's indexed codebase.
Agent Direction
Sourcegraph is shifting to Amp for agentic workflows. Cursor continues investing in Composer and Background Agents within its IDE.
Verdict
Cursor and Cody serve different primary purposes. Cursor is a generative AI IDE designed around writing and editing code with AI assistance. Cody's strength has always been codebase understanding, powered by Sourcegraph's code graph that indexes your entire codebase (including dependencies and documentation) for deep contextual answers. For writing new code, Cursor's Composer and tab completions are clearly superior. For navigating, understanding, and answering questions about large existing codebases, Cody's integration with Sourcegraph search is unmatched. However, Sourcegraph sunset Cody Free and Pro plans in mid-2025, pushing individual users toward their new Amp tool while maintaining Cody Enterprise ($59/user/mo) for organizations. If you're on Cody Enterprise, you get powerful codebase intelligence. If you need an individual tool, Cursor at $20/mo Pro is the stronger choice now.
Pros & Cons Compared
Cursor
Cody
Pricing Comparison
Cursor
$20/moFree tier with limited usage. Pro at $20/mo with unlimited Tab completion and Auto mode plus a $20 credit pool for premium models. Ultra at $200/mo with ~20x Pro usage. Teams at $40/user/mo with admin controls.
Cody
FreemiumFree tier with unlimited autocompletes and 200 chats/mo. Pro tier with increased limits and more model options. Enterprise pricing available with single-tenant deployment and advanced governance.
Shared Language Support
Both Cursor and Cody support these languages:
Which Should You Choose?
Choose Cursor if you...
- Need a standalone AI IDE for daily code generation and editing
- Want autonomous multi-file editing with Composer
- Are an individual developer or small team
- Prefer an all-in-one tool rather than a separate IDE extension
- Need Background Agents for parallel autonomous tasks
Choose Cody if you...
- Work with massive codebases spanning multiple repositories
- Need deep codebase understanding and cross-repo search
- Are an enterprise team already using Sourcegraph
- Want AI answers grounded in your entire code graph
- Need enterprise compliance, SSO, and audit capabilities
Switching Between Cursor and Cody
If migrating from Cody (due to the Free/Pro sunset) to Cursor: Download Cursor and import your VS Code settings. You'll gain Composer and better code generation but lose Sourcegraph's deep code graph search. Consider keeping Sourcegraph search as a separate tool alongside Cursor. If evaluating Cody Enterprise alongside Cursor: They complement each other well, using Cody for code intelligence and search while using Cursor for active development. Sourcegraph's new Amp tool may be worth evaluating as a Cody successor for agentic coding workflows.
Sources & Methodology
Comparison outcomes are based on criterion-level scoring, pricing disclosures, official feature documentation, and practical workflow fit across IDE and CLI contexts.
- Cursor official website
- Cody official website
- Last reviewed: 2026-02-23
FAQ
Is Cody still available for individual developers?
As of mid-2025, Sourcegraph sunset Cody Free and Cody Pro. Individual developers are directed to Amp, Sourcegraph's new agentic coding tool. Cody Enterprise ($59/user/mo) remains available for organizations.
Which is better for understanding large codebases?
Cody, by a significant margin. Its integration with Sourcegraph's code graph means it can search across repositories, dependencies, and documentation to provide contextual answers. Cursor indexes the current project but can't do cross-repo intelligence.
Can Cursor replace Cody for an enterprise team?
Partially. Cursor is better for code generation and editing, but it lacks Cody's deep codebase search and cross-repository intelligence. Enterprise teams often benefit from using both tools together.
What is Sourcegraph Amp and how does it compare to Cursor?
Amp is Sourcegraph's new agentic coding tool built for collaboration and autonomous development workflows. It's positioned as a successor to Cody Free/Pro for individual developers, with a focus on agent-driven coding rather than search-first intelligence.
Is Cursor or Cody better for code completion?
Cursor offers significantly better code completions. Its multi-line tab completions with codebase indexing are among the best available. Cody's autocomplete is functional but was never its primary strength.