Agentic AI Comparison:
Sourcegraph Cody AI vs supermaven

Sourcegraph Cody AI - AI toolvssupermaven logo (listing unavailable)

Introduction

Cody is Sourcegraph’s enterprise coding assistant using repository search context for chat, edits and completions. Supermaven is a sunsetted coding assistant whose remaining service is free autocomplete for existing customers. Ratings are subjective editorial opinions about each product’s stated purpose, not measured benchmarks or a claim that different workflows are interchangeable.

Overview

Sourcegraph Cody AI

Cody is Sourcegraph’s enterprise coding assistant using repository search context for chat, edits and completions.

supermaven

Supermaven is a sunsetted coding assistant whose remaining service is free autocomplete for existing customers.

Editorial ratings · 1–10, higher is better

These scores express our judgement of the cited product facts. They are not measured performance benchmarks. Each product is assessed for its stated purpose; a higher score does not make different workflows interchangeable.

Evidence gaps lower confidence and affect the relevant judgement. Unknown pricing does not mean free access. Research prototypes and retired products retain their historical scope, with adoption ratings reflecting current access.

Ratings assessed: 2026-10-26. Source verification dates may differ.

Documented capability: How useful and complete is the documented workflow for the product's stated purpose?

  • 1–2: No usable current workflow established, or only an unsupported promise.
  • 3–4: Historical, experimental or very limited workflow; substantial delivery gaps.
  • 5–6: Concrete but narrow workflow, or promising research requiring specialist review.
  • 7–8: Substantial documented end-to-end workflow with useful controls or customization.
  • 9–10: Exceptionally complete documented scope and controls; reserve 10 for unusually strong evidence.

Ease of adoption: Can the intended user obtain and set up a usable product today?

  • 1–2: Discontinued, unavailable, waitlisted, or no usable deployment path verified.
  • 3–4: Archived software, restricted research/preorder access or uncertain current service access.
  • 5–6: Developer-managed setup, significant configuration or sales-led implementation.
  • 7–8: Active accessible product with manageable setup for its intended user.
  • 9–10: Straightforward self-service access and setup, with unusually few adoption obstacles.

Value and cost clarity: How attractive and understandable is the cost model for the documented use?

  • 1–2: No current purchasable or usable offer; historical prices cannot support a purchase.
  • 3–4: Material price, entitlement, license or availability uncertainty limits budgeting.
  • 5–6: Plausible value with custom pricing, significant setup costs or incomplete selected-plan terms.
  • 7–8: Useful scope with clear entry pricing/allowances or accessible source, while accounting for running costs.
  • 9–10: Exceptionally accessible and clear cost model for substantial useful scope; never assume free compute.

Integration options: How useful and extensible are the verified user-facing connections for the intended workflow?

  • 1–2: No current user-facing connection verified, or former connections are unavailable.
  • 3–4: Inputs/exports or one focused connection; internal dependencies are not native connectors.
  • 5–6: Useful API, configurable tools or several relevant connections, with limited verified breadth.
  • 7–8: Broad relevant connections or an extensible documented API/MCP/tool ecosystem.
  • 9–10: Extensive documented ecosystem with multiple connection mechanisms and strong task relevance.

Metrics Comparison

Documented capability

Sourcegraph Cody AI: 8/10

Evidence confidence: medium

Search-grounded chat, auto-edit, prompts and context controls support enterprise code assistance.

supermaven: 5/10

Evidence confidence: high

Historical code completion remains useful for existing users, but agent conversations have been withdrawn.

Compare the workflow you need, not just the number of advertised features.

Ease of adoption

Sourcegraph Cody AI: 6/10

Evidence confidence: medium

Current documentation identifies Enterprise support and sales-led access, with editor setup.

supermaven: 2/10

Evidence confidence: high

The sunset notice describes continuing access for existing customers, not a current full-service adoption path.

Check current access, setup and human responsibilities for your team.

Value and cost clarity

Sourcegraph Cody AI: 5/10

Evidence confidence: medium

Confirm current enterprise licensing and model terms rather than using old individual prices.

supermaven: 2/10

Evidence confidence: high

Old paid plans no longer describe the current offer; remaining existing-user autocomplete is free.

Compare the full cost, including usage, implementation and required services.

Integration options

Sourcegraph Cody AI: 8/10

Evidence confidence: medium

Sourcegraph search, code hosts and multiple IDEs provide relevant code-context connections.

supermaven: 3/10

Evidence confidence: high

Existing editor autocomplete remains narrower than the former chat and agent workflow.

Match the documented connections to the systems you actually use.

Conclusions

Evaluate it with a Sourcegraph Enterprise deployment. Current adoption requires enterprise terms rather than historical individual free or Pro plans. Do not buy from the historical plan table. The November 2025 notice ends agent conversations and recommends a separate move to Cursor; existing-user autocomplete is not a new full-agent offer.

All AI Agents
Sourcegraph Cody AIsupermaven (listing unavailable)
Try the real workflow

The best framework is the one you can keep current and afford to run.

Run OpenClaw or Hermes with saved memory, one-click runtime updates, and your choice of Platform Credits, provider keys, or supported subscriptions.

Runs without your laptopBrowser + messaging appsCredits, keys, or subscriptionsMemory survives restarts

Plans start at $199/month. Cancel anytime.

Hosted agent

OpenClaw or Hermes

saved state
Browser
WhatsApp
Telegram
Slack
“I checked the inbox, handled the routine messages, and sent you the one question that needs a decision.”
Create an AI worker that keeps running after this tab closes.
Open Agent Teams