Head to head · Verified 2026-10-26
Augment Code vs CodeRabbit
Augment Code covers more of the baseline (6.5/9 vs 6/9), but the split matters more than the total. Everything below comes from each vendor's public documentation, mapped against the same 9 standards.
Augment Code
AI PR Review
Code review agent in the Cosmos platform: risk-triaged inline PR comments with full-codebase context; GitHub-native, others via CLI.
- Licence
- Proprietary
- Self-hosting
- Cloud only
- From
- $20/mo flat (Standard)
CodeRabbit
AI PR Review
Hosted AI PR reviewer with summaries, linter/SAST integration, and agentic chat across GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, and Bitbucket.
- Licence
- Proprietary
- Self-hosting
- Enterprise only
- From
- $24/dev/mo
The short answer
Across the 9 standards, Augment Code is better documented on 4 (context depth, rule control, sandbox validation and cost control), CodeRabbit on 3 (local and PR review, business-logic checks and actionable fixes), and 2 come out even.
On deployment they are not interchangeable: Augment Code is cloud-only, while CodeRabbit is self-hostable only on an enterprise contract. If code cannot leave your network, that single row decides the evaluation before anything else on this page.
Pick Augment Code if you care most about context depth, rule control and sandbox validation.
Pick CodeRabbit if you care most about local and PR review, business-logic checks and actionable fixes.
Side by side
| Fact | Augment Code | CodeRabbit |
|---|---|---|
| Licensing | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Self-hosting • | No | Enterprise only |
| Free tier • | Trial only | Limited free tier |
| Pricing • | Standard $20/mo flat (up to 50 seats) incl. $20/mo pooled usage; Business $100/mo flat (up to 50 seats) incl. $100/mo pooled usage; both plus flat 40% fee on LLM usage; Enterprise custom with unlimited seats/repos. Code review on all plans | Free (public/open-source repos); Essentials $24/dev/mo (annual, $30 monthly); Team $48/dev/mo (annual, $60 monthly); Advanced $72/dev/mo; Enterprise custom. Rate limits 5/8/10/12 reviewed PRs/dev/hour by tier, plus $0.25/file overage with an admin-set cap |
| Model control • | Choose from a vendor model list (Claude, GPT-5.x, Gemini families); no BYOK | Fixed vendor models; no BYOK on standard plans (own LLM provider only on self-hosted Enterprise) |
| Platforms | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps |
| Last verified • | 2026-10-26 | 2026-10-21 |
• marks a row where the two genuinely differ.
All 9 standards
✓ documented · ~ partial · ✗ not offered · ? undocumented. The arrow marks which tool documents more on that standard — it is not a quality judgement, only a coverage one.
Augment Code: Context Engine reads the full codebase; cross-repo context via external repos declared in AGENTS.md.
CodeRabbit: Diff plus related files, learnings, linters/SAST; linked-repo analysis capped (1 on Pro, 10 on Pro Plus).
Augment Code: YAML review guidelines with globs and severities; docs commit to high signal-to-noise and no style nags.
CodeRabbit: Custom instructions, path filters, and a quieter review profile; default posture is verbose.
Augment Code: Native GitHub app for PR reviews; GitLab/Bitbucket/Azure DevOps reviews run via CLI-based CI/CD automation instead. No distinct local pre-commit review mode documented.
CodeRabbit: IDE extensions (VS Code, Cursor, Windsurf) and CLI pre-commit reviews alongside PR reviews.
Augment Code: Jira Cloud and Linear integrations plus MCP tools; ticket-vs-code validation not explicitly documented.
CodeRabbit: Jira and Linear integration on paid plans; checks changes against linked tickets.
Augment Code: Code Review Memory captures reviewer feedback and distills per-repo knowledge shared across agents.
CodeRabbit: Learnings accumulate from team replies; stops flagging patterns you tell it are fine.
Augment Code: Cosmos Verifier agent exercises changes in a running environment and reports evidence-backed findings.
CodeRabbit: Pro Plus adds pre-merge checks and unit test generation; no documented sandbox execution of findings.
Augment Code: No BYOK; model choice from a vendor list; discloses a flat 40% fee on LLM usage with a credit dashboard.
CodeRabbit: No BYOK or model choice on standard plans; model costs bundled into seat price.
Augment Code: 'Fix in Augment' hands findings to an agent session in IDE/CLI; no one-click commit from the PR.
CodeRabbit: One-click committable suggestions, agentic chat on the PR, and fix flows via IDE extensions.
Augment Code: Dashboard: PRs reviewed, % comments addressed, thumbs-up rate, estimated dev hours saved; no DORA metrics.
CodeRabbit: Analytics and reports on paid tiers; no documented token-level cost or DORA ROI reporting.
Augment Code vs CodeRabbit: FAQ
What is the main difference between Augment Code and CodeRabbit?
Augment Code covers more of the baseline (6.5/9 vs 6/9), but the split matters more than the total. Augment Code is cloud-only and proprietary; CodeRabbit is self-hostable only on an enterprise contract and proprietary.
Is Augment Code cheaper than CodeRabbit?
Augment Code starts at $20/mo flat (Standard) and CodeRabbit at $24/dev/mo, as published by each vendor on 2026-10-26 and 2026-10-21. Compare total cost rather than seat price: Augment Code bills models as choose from a vendor model list (claude, gpt-5.x, gemini families); no byok, CodeRabbit as fixed vendor models; no byok on standard plans (own llm provider only on self-hosted enterprise).
Can Augment Code and CodeRabbit be self-hosted?
Augment Code: No — No self-hosted offering for the review service itself; Cosmos supports 'daemon mode' to run agent sessions on a VM/laptop you operate, but that is compute placement, not self-hosting. Enterprise cites custom compute and multi-region deployment in Augment's cloud. CodeRabbit: Enterprise only — Self-hosted deployment on custom-priced Enterprise; docs cite availability for orgs with 500+ seats, connecting to your own LLM provider.
Do Augment Code and CodeRabbit support the same platforms?
Both document support for GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps. Augment Code additionally documents nothing else; CodeRabbit adds nothing else.
Which one scores higher against the 9-pillar standard?
Augment Code scores 6.5/9 against 6/9. The score is coverage of documented capability, not quality of findings — the full formula is on the methodology page.
[ Related comparisons ]
Neither is an obvious fit?
Filter all 27 tools by the constraint that actually rules candidates out.