GreptilevsKorbit
Generated from the two spec rows. Green marks the better value where a spec has a clear direction. Everything else is just different.
Greptile
Greptile · Code review agent
#154MCP
Panel
5.54 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.3
- Usefulness
- 5.7
- Cost
- 5.2
- Longevity
- 5.8
“Reads your entire repository to review one pull request, then charges a dollar a credit once the fifty run out.”
Korbit
Korbit Technologies · Code review agent
#202
Panel
5.42 spec wins
- Reliability
- 5.0
- Usefulness
- 5.3
- Cost
- 5.8
- Longevity
- 5.5
“Ask Korbit lets you chat with your codebase, which makes it the one reviewer that talks back.”
Spec by spec
| Spec | Greptile | Korbit |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture | ||
| Category | Code review agent | Code review agent |
| Runs | cloud | cloud |
| Platforms | web | web |
| Context window | not documented | not documented |
| Protocols | ||
| MCP client | No | No |
| MCP server | Yes | No |
| Capabilities | ||
| Runs terminal commands | No | No |
| Multi-file edits | No | No |
| Git operations | No | Yes |
| Browser control | No | No |
| Sandboxed execution | NoDocker Compose and Kubernetes are self-hosting deployment options, not an isolation sandbox for agent-executed code. | No |
| Multi-agent orchestration | No | No |
| Headless / CI mode | YesThe CLI authenticates from a GREPTILE_API_KEY environment variable and offers `greptile review --json` plus `greptile review status` exit codes for pipelines. | Yes |
| Models | ||
| Backbone | Claude, GPT | OpenAI, Anthropic |
| Bring your own model | YesSelf-hosted deployments pick their own provider and model IDs for the smart, fast and embedding roles, across OpenAI, Anthropic, AWS Bedrock, Azure OpenAI and GCP Vertex AI. | No |
| Local models | YesThe self-hosted Docker Compose install takes OPENAI_API_BASE_URL and ANTHROPIC_BASE_URL, so any OpenAI- or Anthropic-compatible endpoint you host yourself can back the reviewer. | No |
| Cost | ||
| Pricing model | seat | seat |
| Starts at | $30/mo | $12/mo |
| Free tier | Yes | Yes |
| Bring your own key | Yes | No |
| Openness | ||
| Open source | No | No |
| License | proprietary | proprietary |
| GitHub stars | n/a | n/a |
Which one would each critic pick
| Critic | Greptile | Korbit | Pick |
|---|---|---|---|
| El Juez | — | — | not enough reviews |
| El Amigo | 6.8 | 6.3 | Greptile — Pick Greptile when the bugs in your pull requests come from code the diff does not show; pick CodeRabbit for more hosts and free public repos. |
| El Crítico | 5.5 | 5.8 | Korbit — The FAQ caps parallel scans at two with automatic queuing, so a Friday merge train waits in line behind itself. |
| El Profesor | 5.8 | 5.3 | Greptile — The whole-repository index is the correct architecture for review; whether it works is unmeasured, because 50 vendor-selected bugs is not a sample size. |
| La Inversora | 6.0 | 6.0 | no preference |
| La Jefa | 5.8 | 6.3 | Korbit — Sixty Pro seats is $720 a month on annual and Max is $1,080, code is retained only for the duration of the scan with zero-day retention at the providers, and SSO is not on the pricing page. |
| El Hacker | 3.3 | 3.0 | Greptile — Closed and cloud-first, with my own model endpoints buried in the Enterprise-only Compose install; the one thing I can script against is the hosted MCP server, which is at least something. |
Picks are derived from each critic's own scores. Humans vote on matchups on the duels page.