DeepSourcevsQodo
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
DeepSource
DeepSource · Code review agent
#64MCP
Panel
6.13 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.3
- Usefulness
- 6.3
- Cost
- 5.0
- Longevity
- 6.8
“It detects committed secrets, which is mostly a tool for finding out which of your colleagues commits secrets.”
Qodo
Qodo · Code review agent
#122MCP
Panel
5.80 spec wins
- Reliability
- 6.0
- Usefulness
- 6.0
- Cost
- 5.2
- Longevity
- 6.2
“Renamed from CodiumAI, moved the open-source part to another organization, and kept the governance dashboard.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | DeepSource | Qodo |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Code review agent | Code review agent |
| Runs | cloud | cloud, local |
| Platforms | web | macos, linux, windows, web |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | No | No |
| MCP server | Yes | Yes |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | No | No |
| Multi-file edits | Yes | No |
| Git operations | YesAutofix commits corrections back to the pull request. | Yes |
| Browser control | No | NoQodo works over git provider APIs and repository context only, with no browser tool or browser automation integration. |
| Sandboxed execution | No | No |
| Multi-agent orchestration | No | No |
| Headless / CI mode | Yes | Yes |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | Anthropic Claude, OpenAI GPT, Google Gemini | |
| Bring your own model | YesBYOK for AI Review, with inference on your own infrastructure, is an Enterprise-tier feature. | YesEnterprise only: BYOK routes your own LLM keys through Qodo, and single-tenant, on-prem and air-gapped deployments let you host the platform, but no custom model endpoint is documented. |
| Local models | No | NoOn-prem and air-gapped deployment is offered, yet nothing in the docs describes pointing Qodo at a local or self-hosted model endpoint. |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | mixed | mixed |
| Starts at | $24/mo | $30/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | No |
| Bring your own key | Yes | Yes |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | No | No |
| License | proprietary | proprietary |
| GitHub stars | n/a | n/a |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | DeepSource | Qodo | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 6.5 | 6.5 | no preference |
| El Crítico | 6.0 | 5.8 | DeepSource — The automatic correction commits back to the pull request, so a wrong fix becomes a commit with your pipeline's approval and your author's name near it. |
| El Profesor | 6.5 | 5.8 | DeepSource — Deterministic analysers and model agents produce findings into the same comment stream with no published split between them, and no precision figure for either. |
| La Inversora | 7.5 | 6.8 | DeepSource — A $24 per-user subscription with review metered per processed line on top, and bring-your-own-inference held back for the enterprise tier, is a well-designed expansion ladder. |
| La Jefa | 6.3 | 6.5 | Qodo — Qodo is built for the meeting where legal asks who reviewed what, but SSO and on-prem are Enterprise-only at custom pricing, so budget the sales call before the seats. |
| El Hacker | 4.0 | 3.8 | DeepSource — Closed and hosted, except that running inference on my own infrastructure with my own keys exists and sits behind a sales conversation, which is my least favourite kind of open. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.