Back to vendors
Q

Qodo

Also known as: Codium, Qodo Context Engine, Qodo IDE

Visit site
Entry priceFrom $30/user/mo · free tierFull pricing detail

Code integrity platform (formerly Codium) with AI-powered code review, testing generation, and quality analysis tools.

Qodo is an agentic code review and code integrity platform built around a single job: making sure the code a team ships is correct, consistent, and compliant. Formerly known as CodiumAI and founded in 2022, it takes a deliberately review-first stance rather than a copilot-first one. Where most AI coding tools focus on writing more code, Qodo focuses on verifying it, and because it sits outside the generation loop it can independently check code regardless of which assistant a developer used to write it, avoiding the confirmation bias of one model both producing and approving its own work.

The heart of the platform, reworked in its 2.0 release, is a multi-agent review architecture. Instead of one model trying to do everything in a single pass, specialized agents each take a focused concern, such as bug detection, security, performance, and test coverage, which raises the signal-to-noise of the feedback. A context engine reasons across whole codebases, dependencies, and pull request history so review agents can judge how a change affects other services and repositories, not just a single file.

Qodo meets developers in the tools they already use. A Git plugin runs automated pull request reviews on GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, and Azure DevOps, prioritizing findings by severity and generating PR descriptions and documentation through commands like /describe and /add_docs. An IDE plugin for VS Code and JetBrains adds code generation, chat, and automated test generation through a /test command, a capability inherited from its CodiumAI roots that produces meaningful unit tests covering edge cases and gaps in coverage. A CLI extends these workflows into the terminal and CI.

A Review Standards system learns a team's conventions from its codebase, pull request history, and requirements, evolving into a single source of truth that agents apply on every review. Qodo's core review engine, PR-Agent, is open source and can be self-hosted with a team's own model keys, and the platform deploys from SaaS to fully air-gapped on-premises with SOC 2 compliance, making it a fit for regulated industries that need to review AI-generated code without sending it to outside services.

Vendor details

Canonical URL

https://www.qodo.ai/

Category

Coding agent

Company status

independent

Use cases & customers

Target customers

developersenterprises

Deployment options

SaaSself-hosted

In practice

Your team writes more code with Copilot and Claude Code than anyone can review, and you worry about bugs slipping through. Qodo reviews every pull request with specialized agents for logic, security, and performance, independent of whichever tool wrote the code.

A legacy module has almost no test coverage. In your IDE, Qodo's /test command analyzes the code, finds the untested paths, and generates meaningful unit tests with edge cases, giving you a coverage baseline to refine.

You're in a regulated industry and code can't leave your network. Qodo's open-source review engine self-hosts with your own model keys, and the platform offers air-gapped deployment so reviews never touch outside services.

Agentic Index coverage score

8.5 / 14 capabilities · 61%

Integrations & Tool CallingAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Full
Workflow OrchestrationAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Knowledge Grounding & RAGAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Full
Human Oversight & GuardrailsAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Security, Identity & GovernanceAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Observability & AuditabilityAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Unable to verify
Memory & State PersistenceAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Deployment & Data ResidencyAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Full
Prebuilt Agents, Templates & PacksAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Full
Triggers & Channel CoverageAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Model Flexibility & RoutingAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
APIs, SDKs & MCP ExtensibilityAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Full
Testing, Debugging & OptimizationAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Partial
Browser & Computer UseAgentic AI Index Expansion Evidence Report Unable to verify

The Agentic Index coverage score grades every vendor Full, Partial or Unable to verify against the same 14 buyer facing capabilities, from public evidence only. Each capability links to how all vendors in the index score on it. How this evidence is graded

Recent platform changes

2026-07-02·Memory / stateVerified

Qodo 2.4 removed most of its repo-wide RAG indexing layer for code review, replacing it with an agent-driven fetch-on-demand loop plus long-term memory over PR history. The agent now rediscovers code context itself via git and grep, while retrieval is reserved for team-specific review decisions, repeated feedback, and conventions that cannot be recovered from the working tree. Qodo reports the leaner architecture leads on its review benchmarks with a fraction of the indexing infrastructure.

Bears on: Memory / state

View source
2026-06-24·Security / enterprisePartially Verified

Qodo announced three governance capabilities for AI-generated code at enterprise scale. Cross-Repo Code Review (beta) extends its Git plugin so that when a PR modifies a shared dependency, the agent reads registered consumer repos and surfaces cross-system impact findings (function-signature violations, API-contract breaks, schema evolution, and infrastructure drift) directly on the PR before merge. Rules Miner automatically discovers coding standards from a team's existing codebase rather than requiring them to be defined up front. Skill Review Standards adds centralized governance for agent skills, discovering them across repos and surfacing them in a portal with impact measurement.

Bears on: Security / enterprise

View source
View all 2 changes for Qodo →Tracked since Jun 2026 · Verified from public vendor sources

Pricing

From $30/user/mo · free tier

hybrid

Free tierTrial available

Included quota

Developer (free): 30 PR reviews/mo (org pool, reduced from 75) + 250 IDE/CLI credits/mo, IDE plugin, CLI, community support. Teams ($30/user/mo annual): 2,500 IDE/CLI credits/user/mo (10x free), agentic PR review (20 PRs/user/mo standard - currently unlimited as a limited-time promo), Living Rules System, Git + IDE integrations, governance dashboard, standard support, up to ~30 users. Enterprise (custom): SSO/SAML, audit logs, governance analytics, BYOK, single-tenant SaaS or on-prem/air-gapped, multi-repo Context Engine, priority support + SLA.

What is public

Qodo (qodo.ai, formerly CodiumAI, rebranded Sept 30 2024 - AI code-quality platform: Qodo Gen for IDE/CLI code+test generation, Qodo Merge for agentic PR review, Qodo Cover for autonomous test gen) has three tiers. Developer: free forever (30 PR reviews/mo org-wide [reduced from 75] + 250 IDE/CLI credits/mo, IDE plugin, CLI, community support; works GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket/Azure DevOps). Teams (Pro Teams): $30/user/mo annual ($38 monthly), with 2,500 credits/user/mo, agentic PR review, Living Rules System, and up to ~30 users on shared workspace credits. Enterprise: custom (~$45/user cited; SSO/SAML, audit logs, BYOK, single-tenant SaaS or on-prem/air-gapped, cross-repo context, SLA). PR-Agent (the OSS core of Qodo Merge, Apache 2.0, 11.5k stars) self-hosts free with your own LLM keys; qualified OSS projects get free access via Qodo for Open Source.

Billing mechanics

Hybrid: per-seat ($30/user/mo Teams) PLUS credit-metered Gen usage and a separate PR-review allocation. Credits power IDE/CLI AI features - a standard request costs 1 credit, premium models cost more (Claude Opus 5 credits, Grok 4 = 4 credits each); credits are shared across the workspace, reset monthly (30 days from first message), and don't roll over. PR reviews (Qodo Merge) are metered separately by review count (not Gen credits). Overage runs at the same per-credit rate (no premium/penalty) against a monthly spending cap you set and control.

Cost watchouts

Two separate meters (Gen credits + PR-review allocation) make the model layered; premium models (Claude Opus) burn 4-5x the credits of a standard request; credits don't roll over (underuse = wasted spend); the Teams 'unlimited PR reviews' is a LIMITED-TIME PROMO - the standard is 20 PRs/user/mo (confirm with sales before committing); pricier per-seat than some review-only rivals (CodeRabbit $24, Copilot Business $19)

Variable cost rationale

Hybrid - a fixed per-seat base plus usage that scales with credit consumption (model choice matters: Opus 5x a standard request) and PR-review volume; the spending cap bounds overage, and PR-Agent self-host removes per-credit cost for teams with DevOps capacity

Additional watchouts

Layered pricing (Gen credits + PR-review pool) is harder to forecast than flat per-seat rivals; premium-model requests burn credits fast; the Teams 'unlimited reviews' promo may end (standard 20 PRs/user/mo); pricier per seat than review-only competitors; overkill if you only want code completion (it's a quality/test/review platform)

Overage / add-ons

When base credits are depleted, reviews/usage keep running and you enter overage at the SAME per-credit rate as your plan (no premium, no penalty), accruing against a monthly spending cap you set and can change anytime; you're notified before hitting the cap. Credits reset monthly with no rollover; PR-review pools are per-plan.

Sales call required

Mixed (some tiers require a call)

Free / trial

Free (Developer tier)

Lowest paid plan

Teams $30/user/mo AE

Commercial notes

Formerly CodiumAI (rebranded Sept 30 2024; $40M Series A Sept 2024); differentiator is testing-first DNA (Qodo Cover autonomous test gen) + the Living Rules System for enforcing org coding standards, unifying review + generation + testing in one quality workflow; multi-repo Context Engine for large codebases; model-flexible backend (Claude/OpenAI/others); competes with CodeRabbit ($24), CodeAnt AI ($24-$40), GitHub Copilot Business ($19), Greptile, Ellipsis

Key ambiguities

Teams price is mostly cited at $30/user/mo annual ($38 monthly) but some aggregators show $19/user/mo (possibly a promo/older rate - verify; $30 is the current consensus); user caps differ across sources (docs say 'unlimited users per workspace,' some reviews say up to 30); the 'no permanent free tier' note on the pricing page conflicts with the free-forever Developer plan (it refers to unlimited-review access expiring after trial); Enterprise is custom (~$45/user/mo cited by some)

Cancellation / refund

Free Developer plan (no card, free forever with limits); 14-day trial unlocks unlimited reviews + credits; Teams self-serve monthly or annual (annual 21% cheaper); Enterprise custom (annual contract); switch/upgrade/downgrade credit packs from the dashboard (effective next cycle); qualified OSS projects free via Qodo for Open Source

Support SLA / resale

Community support (Developer); standard support on Teams (docs, in-product help, ticket); Enterprise adds priority response, dedicated SLA, and an assigned Qodo account contact; BYOK on Enterprise; single-tenant SaaS or on-prem/air-gapped deployment; PR-Agent OSS self-host (Docker, your own LLM keys); no training on your code

Missing data

Teams price varies across sources ($30/user/mo annual consensus vs $19 in some aggregators); user caps differ (docs 'unlimited per workspace' vs reviews' ~30); Enterprise is custom (~$45/user/mo cited); the 'unlimited PR reviews' Teams promo may not persist. Seed 'Developer free; Teams $30/user/mo annual; self-hosted enterprise docs public' is accurate and current; note the credit-based metering and the PR-Agent OSS self-host path.

Agentic Index verified 2026-06-25

Alternatives to Qodo

The closest documented capability profiles to Qodo among coding agents tracked by Agentic Index, ordered by similarity on the same 14 point evidence the rankings use. No vendor pays for placement.

  • 10Web8.0 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability
  • Goose9.0 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability
  • Moderne10.0 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability
  • Cline10.5 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability
  • Continue10.5 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability
  • Tabnine7.5 / 14Adds documented Observability & Auditability

Similarity is computed from each vendor's Agentic Index coverage score evidence, axis by axis, not from the totals. How this evidence is graded

Contact us

Found a vendor we missed? Have feedback on the index? We'd love to hear from you.