Cody vs Cursor 2.0
Cody and Cursor 2.0 are both Code Generation tools in our directory. This side-by-side comparison covers pricing, user ratings, supported platforms, key features and open-source status so you can decide which one fits your needs.
Side-by-side comparison
| Attribute | Cody | Cursor 2.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Sourcegraph | Anysphere |
| Rating | ★ 4.2 | ★ 4.6 |
| Pricing | Freemium | Paid |
| Platforms | Desktop, Web | Desktop |
| Key features | Codebase-wide context, Multi-repository search, Inline edits and chat | Multi-agent parallel runs, Side-by-side diff review, Composer mode |
| Headquarters | San Mateo, USA | San Francisco, USA |
| Founded | 2023 | 2025 |
| Open source | No | No |
Key differences
- Cursor 2.0 has a higher user rating (4.6★ vs 4.2★).
- Cody is Freemium, while Cursor 2.0 is Paid.
- Cody runs on Desktop, Web; Cursor 2.0 runs on Desktop.
Frequently asked questions
Is Cody or Cursor 2.0 better?
By user rating, Cursor 2.0 scores higher (4.6★ vs 4.2★). Both are capable Code Generation tools, so review the feature comparison for your use case.
Which is cheaper, Cody or Cursor 2.0?
Cody is Freemium and Cursor 2.0 is Paid. Check each product page for current plan details.
Are Cody and Cursor 2.0 open source?
No — neither Cody nor Cursor 2.0 is open source.