Skip to content
[ aicodereview.io ]

Head to head · Verified 2026-08-11

Greptile vs Kodus

Kodus covers more of the baseline (6.5/9 vs 4.5/9), but the split matters more than the total. Everything below comes from each vendor's public documentation, mapped against the same 9 standards.

Greptile

AI PR Review

AI code reviewer that indexes the whole codebase into a graph; its TREX agent writes and runs tests for PRs in a sandbox.

4.5/9 Coverage score 4.5 out of 9
Licence
Proprietary
Self-hosting
Enterprise only
From
$30/seat/mo

Kodus

AI PR Review

Open-source AI code review built to run where the organization controls: self-hosted or cloud, models under your keys, org-wide Kody Rules.

6.5/9 Coverage score 6.5 out of 9
Licence
Open source
Self-hosting
Self-hostable
From
$10/dev/mo

The short answer

Across the 9 standards, Greptile is better documented on 2 (sandbox validation and actionable fixes), Kodus on 5 (context depth, rule control, business-logic checks, cost control and ROI reporting), and 2 come out even.

On deployment they are not interchangeable: Greptile is self-hostable only on an enterprise contract, while Kodus is fully self-hostable on a standard plan. If code cannot leave your network, that single row decides the evaluation before anything else on this page.

Kodus publishes its source under AGPL-3.0 (dual-licensed; enterprise-marked files commercial); Greptile is proprietary. That changes what you can audit, fork, and keep running if the vendor's terms change.

Pick Greptile if you care most about sandbox validation and actionable fixes.

Pick Kodus if you care most about context depth, rule control and business-logic checks, the reviewer has to run inside your own infrastructure and you want to read the source before you trust it.

Side by side

Fact Greptile Kodus
Licensing Proprietary Open source — AGPL-3.0 (dual-licensed; enterprise-marked files commercial)
Self-hosting Enterprise only Yes — full stack
Free tier Limited free tier Limited free tier
Pricing Free 50 credits/mo (1 dev); Pro $30/seat/mo with 50 credits/seat, $1 per extra credit; TREX review = 3 credits; Enterprise custom; OSS and startup programs Free Community cloud tier (BYOK, up to 10 Kody Rules); Teams $10/dev/mo + your token costs; Enterprise custom; self-hosting free under AGPL
Model control Fixed vendor models; no BYOK on standard plans BYOK on every plan: OpenAI, Anthropic, Gemini, Vertex, Novita, or any OpenAI-compatible endpoint (vLLM/Ollama); zero token markup
Platforms GitHub, GitLab GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Forgejo
Last verified 2026-08-11 2026-08-11

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.

~

Greptile: Graph index of the full codebase gives deep cross-file context; ticket/business context is not a focus.

Kodus: Repo-level analysis plus linked sibling repos; pulls business context from Jira, Linear, and Notion.

~

Greptile: Plain-English custom rules on Pro; community reports on default precision/noise are mixed.

Kodus: Plain-language Kody Rules with global-repo-directory scope; auto-imports .cursorrules, CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md, etc.

~

Greptile: PR-focused; MCP, Claude Code plugin, and one-click IDE fixes exist, but no local review surface documented.

~

Kodus: Reviews run via CLI locally, in CI, and on PRs; distinct local-vs-PR behavior modes not detailed publicly.

Greptile: Focus is code-side context rather than ticket-side; no requirements validation documented.

Kodus: Pulls context from Jira, Linear, and Notion to check a PR against what the ticket asked for.

Greptile: Learns team standards by reading your PR comments over time.

Kodus: Kody generates rules automatically by analyzing team review history; rules and review history persist.

Greptile: TREX writes and runs tests for each PR in a sandbox to demonstrate bugs (3 credits per review).

Kodus: No documented sandbox execution or runtime validation of findings.

Greptile: No BYOK or model choice on standard plans; credit billing does not expose model costs.

Kodus: BYOK on every plan, zero token markup, published cost estimates, token-usage dashboard.

Actionability Greptile ↑

Greptile: One-click IDE fixes and /greploop iterative resolution with coding agents.

~

Kodus: Provides fix suggestions in reviews; one-click commit flow not verified in the posts we checked.

?

Greptile: No review-metrics or ROI dashboards documented in the sources we verified.

~

Kodus: Token-cost and usage dashboard documented; DORA-style ROI reporting not verified in public posts.

Greptile vs Kodus: FAQ

What is the main difference between Greptile and Kodus?

Kodus covers more of the baseline (6.5/9 vs 4.5/9), but the split matters more than the total. Greptile is self-hostable only on an enterprise contract and proprietary; Kodus is fully self-hostable on a standard plan and open source under AGPL-3.0 (dual-licensed; enterprise-marked files commercial).

Is Greptile cheaper than Kodus?

Greptile starts at $30/seat/mo and Kodus at $10/dev/mo, as published by each vendor on 2026-08-11 and 2026-08-11. Compare total cost rather than seat price: Greptile bills models as fixed vendor models; no byok on standard plans, Kodus as byok on every plan: openai, anthropic, gemini, vertex, novita, or any openai-compatible endpoint (vllm/ollama); zero token markup.

Can Greptile and Kodus be self-hosted?

Greptile: Enterprise only — Self-hosted deployment on custom-priced Enterprise tier, alongside SOC 2 Type II and SSO/SAML. Kodus: Yes — full stack — Free under AGPL via Docker Compose, VM, or Kubernetes/Helm; no seat minimums; optional daily heartbeat can be disabled.

Do Greptile and Kodus support the same platforms?

Both document support for GitHub and GitLab. Greptile additionally documents nothing else; Kodus adds Bitbucket, Azure DevOps and Forgejo.

Which one scores higher against the 9-pillar standard?

Kodus scores 6.5/9 against 4.5/9. 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.

Open the directory [↗]