Key Takeaways
- CodeRabbit โ $24/user/month on Pro (billed annually), $48 on Pro Plus; GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket Cloud and Azure DevOps; free forever on public repositories and a 14-day trial on every plan.
- Greptile โ free Starter tier with 50 credits/month for one active developer and unlimited repositories; Pro at $30/seat/month with 50 credits per seat and $1 per extra credit. A standard review costs 1 credit, a deeper TREX review costs 3.
- Qodo โ Pro Team at $30/month for up to 30 users, prepaid credits at $0.012 each (2,500 credits is roughly 18 reviews); 14-day trial with no card; 30+ users moves to custom Enterprise.
- Only CodeRabbit runs a real, checkable affiliate programme โ $30 per qualified signup through Dub. Greptile's "Partners" page is a technology-integration list, and Qodo's "Super Qodoer" is a community stipend, not commission.
- Discounts worth knowing: Greptile is free for qualifying MIT/Apache open-source projects and 50% off for pre-Series A startups under $2M revenue; Qodo runs a free open-source programme; CodeRabbit is free on public repos.
- Cost model is the real fork: per-seat (CodeRabbit) suits steady review volume, per-credit (Greptile, Qodo) suits spiky volume where only a few engineers merge in a given week.
- None of the three publishes an independently audited false-positive rate. Treat any specific percentage you find elsewhere as unverified.
๐ Best Choice by Situation
All three post useful review comments; the tie-breaker is your Git platform, your bug profile, and your security review. Work down this list and stop at the first line that describes you.
- Your repos span GitHub and GitLab (or Azure DevOps) โ CodeRabbit. It is the only one of the three with documented support across all four major platforms, so you buy one tool instead of two.
- Your escaped bugs are cross-file breakage โ Greptile. It indexes the whole repository, so it can flag a change that breaks a function three files away โ something a diff-only reviewer never sees because it never read those files.
- Security review will not clear a SaaS vendor โ Qodo. Single-tenant or fully on-premises deployment with bring-your-own-LLM-key, plus Gerrit support if you are on Google's review workflow.
- You want to try before paying anything โ Greptile's free 50 credits/month, or CodeRabbit on a public repository where it is free forever.
- Your review volume is spiky โ Greptile or Qodo. Paying per review beats paying per seat when only three of your twelve engineers merged anything last week.
What Is an AI Code Review Bot?
An AI code review bot connects to your Git host and comments on pull requests automatically, flagging bugs, security issues and style violations before a human reviewer opens the diff. It runs as a GitHub/GitLab/Bitbucket app or a CI step, posting inline comments, a summary, and in some tools one-click fixes.
This is a different category from an AI coding assistant. Cursor, Copilot and Cline help you *write* the diff inside your editor; a review bot reads the diff *after* it is pushed. The two are complementary, and plenty of teams run both โ see our AI coding assistant guide for the writing half of that stack.
๐ In One Sentence
An AI code review bot is a service that connects to your Git platform and automatically posts review comments on every pull request, flagging bugs, security issues and style violations before a human reviewer looks at the change.
๐ฌ In Plain Terms
It is a reviewer that never sleeps and never gets bored. It will not replace your senior engineer's judgement, but it catches the mechanical problems first, so the human review starts from a cleaner diff.
CodeRabbit vs Greptile vs Qodo: Full Comparison
No single tool wins every column: CodeRabbit takes breadth, Greptile takes depth of context, Qodo takes deployment flexibility. Prices and programme details were verified against each vendor's own pricing page on 28 August 2026 โ recheck if this page has been live more than 90 days.
| Factor | CodeRabbit | Greptile | Qodo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Best for | Broadest platform support, predictable billing | Cross-file and whole-repo context | Enterprise self-hosting and BYOK |
| Entry price | $24/user/mo (Pro, annual) | Free (50 credits/mo); $30/seat/mo Pro | $30/mo prepaid credits, up to 30 users |
| Free option | Free forever on public repos; 14-day trial | Free Starter tier, 1 developer | 14-day trial, no card; OSS programme |
| Git platforms | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket Cloud, Azure DevOps | GitHub (primary); others undocumented | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Gerrit |
| Context depth | Multi-repo analysis on Pro Plus | Full-repo indexing on all tiers | Multi-file agentic PR review |
| Self-hosting | Enterprise tier | Enterprise tier | Single-tenant or full on-prem, BYOK |
| Affiliate programme | Yes โ Dub, $30/qualified signup | No (partners page is integrations) | No (ambassador stipend) |
๐Note: Greptile and Qodo both bill per review rather than per seat. That is usually cheaper for teams where review volume is concentrated in a few engineers, and more expensive for teams where everyone merges every day. Model your actual monthly review count before committing to either model.
CodeRabbit: The Breadth Pick
CodeRabbit is the default recommendation because it works the same way across every major Git platform and prices predictably per seat. If any of your repositories live outside GitHub, this is usually where the decision ends.
CodeRabbit โ Best Overall
$24/user/month, four Git platforms, free forever on public repos
CodeRabbit's Pro tier at $24 per user per month (billed annually) covers agentic PR and CLI reviews, one-click fixes and Jira/Linear integration. Pro Plus at $48 adds multi-repo analysis, custom pre-merge checks and a unit-test generator. Every plan carries a 14-day trial with no card, and public repositories are free forever โ which makes it the lowest-friction way to see real output on real code before spending anything. Its breadth is the differentiator: GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket Cloud and Azure DevOps all behave the same way, so a mixed-platform org buys one tool instead of two.
Pros
- +The only one of the three documented across all four major Git platforms
- +Free forever on public repositories, plus a 14-day trial on every plan
- +Predictable per-seat billing that finance can forecast
- +Ships a CLI and agentic chat alongside the PR bot
Cons
- โPer-seat pricing gets expensive fast if only a few engineers actually merge
- โMulti-repo analysis is gated to the $48 Pro Plus tier, not Pro
- โSelf-hosting requires the Enterprise tier and a sales conversation
Greptile: The Whole-Repo Pick
Greptile indexes your entire repository rather than diffing one pull request in isolation, which is what lets it catch a change that breaks a function three files away. A diff-only reviewer never flags that, because it never read those files.
Greptile โ Best Cross-File Context
Full-repo indexing on every tier, free 50 credits/month to start
Greptile's architecture is the product: it builds an index of the whole codebase, then traces call sites and usage patterns before commenting on a single PR. The free Starter tier gives one active developer 50 credits a month across unlimited repositories, and Pro is $30 per seat per month with 50 included credits plus $1 per additional credit. A standard review costs 1 credit; a deeper TREX review costs 3, so budget against your PR volume rather than the headline seat price. Qualifying MIT or Apache open-source projects get it free, and pre-Series A startups under $2M revenue get 50% off.
Pros
- +Whole-repo indexing is the core architecture, not a higher-tier add-on
- +Genuinely useful free tier โ 50 credits/month, unlimited repositories
- +Free for qualifying MIT/Apache open-source projects
- +50% discount for pre-Series A startups under $2M revenue
Cons
- โDocumented platform support centres on GitHub; other platforms are not confirmed on its own site
- โDeeper TREX reviews cost 3 credits each, so heavy use burns the allowance quickly
- โCredit-based cost is harder to forecast than a flat seat price
Qodo: The Enterprise Pick
Qodo is the one to shortlist when the blocker is procurement rather than product. Single-tenant SaaS or fully on-premises deployment, bring-your-own-LLM-key, and Gerrit support alongside GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps.
Qodo โ Best for Regulated and Air-Gapped Teams
On-prem or single-tenant, BYOK, $30/month prepaid credits
Qodo (formerly CodiumAI) prices its Pro Team plan at $30 a month for up to 30 users, drawing on prepaid credits at $0.012 each โ 2,500 credits works out to roughly 18 reviews a month, and overage continues at the same per-credit rate with no premium, capped wherever you set it. Above 30 users you move to custom Enterprise pricing. The reason to choose it is deployment: single-tenant or fully on-premises with your own LLM key, which is the combination that clears a security review when a shared SaaS reviewer will not. It also has the most explicit IDE story of the three, with VS Code and JetBrains extensions.
Pros
- +Single-tenant or full on-premises deployment with bring-your-own-LLM-key
- +Widest platform list including Gerrit on Enterprise
- +Overage runs at the same per-credit rate โ no penalty pricing
- +VS Code and JetBrains extensions alongside the PR bot
Cons
- โNo permanent free tier โ a 14-day trial and an open-source programme instead
- โPro Team caps at 30 users before custom pricing
- โCredit accounting adds a forecasting step that per-seat billing does not
What Does Each Tool Actually Cost?
CodeRabbit charges per seat; Greptile and Qodo charge per review through credits. That single difference decides more budgets than any feature. The table below prices a realistic scenario: a twelve-engineer team where six people merge regularly, running roughly 120 reviews a month.
| Scenario | CodeRabbit | Greptile | Qodo |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Per seat | Per seat + credits | Prepaid credits |
| 6 active reviewers | $144/mo (6 x $24) | $180/mo (6 x $30) | $30/mo base |
| Credits included | n/a โ unlimited on plan | 300 (6 x 50) | 2,500 (~18 reviews) |
| If volume spikes | No change | +$1 per extra credit | Overage at same rate |
| Free path | Public repos, forever | 50 credits/mo | 14-day trial |
Choose CodeRabbit if you want a number finance can forecast. Choose Greptile or Qodo if your review volume varies month to month and you would rather pay for reviews than for seats.
๐กTip: Count your actual merged PRs for one month before choosing a billing model. Teams consistently overestimate review volume, and the per-credit tools are far cheaper than per-seat when the real number comes in low.
Which Git Platforms Does Each Support?
Qodo and CodeRabbit both cover GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps; Greptile's documented support centres on GitHub. If any of your repositories sit outside GitHub, that narrows the field before pricing even enters the conversation.
- CodeRabbit โ GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket Cloud, Azure DevOps; plus a CLI and agentic chat.
- Greptile โ GitHub confirmed on its own site; other platforms are not documented there, so confirm directly before piloting.
- Qodo โ GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, and Gerrit on Enterprise; VS Code and JetBrains extensions as well.
- Gerrit specifically โ only Qodo lists it. If your organisation runs Google's review workflow, that is effectively a single-vendor decision.
Who Should Use Each Tool?
Team size, platform mix and procurement constraints decide this more than feature lists do. Five profiles cover most readers.
- Solo developer or two-person team โ Greptile's free tier, 50 credits a month, no subscription commitment. Or CodeRabbit free on a public repository.
- Small startup, 3โ15 engineers, cost-sensitive โ Greptile Pro with the pre-Series A 50% discount if you qualify, or CodeRabbit if platform breadth matters more than price.
- Mid-size team standardising across GitHub and GitLab โ CodeRabbit Pro. One flat per-seat price, identical behaviour on both platforms.
- Enterprise with data-residency requirements โ Qodo Enterprise, single-tenant or on-prem with BYOK. See also enterprise compliance for local LLMs for the wider picture.
- Team with deep cross-module dependencies โ Greptile. Whole-repo context is purpose-built for the integration bugs that diff-only review keeps missing.
AI Code Review in the EU, Japan and China
A review bot reads your source code. That makes vendor choice a data-governance question in three major markets, not only a feature comparison.
Common Mistakes When Choosing a Review Bot
- 1Buying per-seat pricing for a spiky review workload
Why it matters: CodeRabbit's flat per-user price gets expensive when only a few engineers merge most weeks. Count your actual monthly merged PRs and compare against Greptile's or Qodo's credit cost before committing to annual per-seat billing. - 2Assuming whole-repo context is free performance
Why it matters: Greptile's deeper TREX review costs 3 credits against 1 for a standard review. Budget credit usage against repository size and PR frequency, not just the advertised seat price. - 3Skipping the Git platform check before trialling
Why it matters: Teams on GitLab or Azure DevOps sometimes start a Greptile trial assuming platform parity with CodeRabbit and Qodo. Confirm current support on the vendor's own docs first โ platform coverage changes faster than comparison pages get updated. - 4Treating vendor bug-detection numbers as audited
Why it matters: CodeRabbit's "2M+ repositories" and "75M+ bugs detected" are self-reported marketing figures, published on its own affiliate and pricing pages. Run a two-to-four week pilot measuring your own escaped-bug rate rather than trusting vendor counts. - 5Confusing a technology-partner page with an affiliate programme
Why it matters: Greptile's Partners page lists companies whose APIs it integrates with, not a referral scheme. Look for an explicit per-referral commission โ a logo wall is not an affiliate programme.
Skip All Three Ifโฆ
If your team merges fewer than five pull requests a week and review turnaround is already same-day, a paid review bot adds cost and comment noise before it adds enough signal to be worth triaging. The value of automated review scales with volume; below a certain throughput, a human reading the diff is simply faster.
The same applies if your team already has a strict review culture that catches what matters. Measure your escaped-bug rate first, and only add a bot if that number justifies it. If you want the capability without the subscription, a local model reviewing diffs is a real option โ see best local LLMs for code review.
๐กTip: A useful trigger: adopt a review bot the first time a bug reaches production that a mechanical check would have caught. That is evidence, where "our competitors use one" is not.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is an AI code review bot?
It is a service that connects to your Git platform โ GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket or Azure DevOps โ and automatically comments on pull requests, flagging bugs, security issues and style violations before a human reviewer looks at the diff. It runs as a Git app or a CI step and posts inline comments plus a summary.
Is CodeRabbit better than Greptile?
CodeRabbit is better for teams needing broad Git platform support and predictable per-seat billing. Greptile is better for teams whose escaped bugs come from cross-file breakage, because it indexes the whole repository rather than diffing one PR in isolation. Neither is universally better โ the right pick depends on your platform mix and your bug profile.
How much does an AI code review bot cost per month?
As of August 2026, CodeRabbit is $24 per user per month on Pro billed annually and $48 on Pro Plus. Greptile has a free tier with 50 credits a month and a $30 per seat per month Pro tier with $1 per extra credit. Qodo's Pro Team is $30 a month for up to 30 users, drawing on prepaid credits at $0.012 each. For Greptile and Qodo the real monthly cost depends on review volume, not seat count.
Do any of them have a free tier?
Yes, more than the marketing suggests. Greptile has a free Starter tier with 50 credits a month for one developer across unlimited repositories. CodeRabbit is free forever on public repositories and gives every plan a 14-day trial. Qodo has no permanent free plan but offers a 14-day trial with no card and a free programme for qualifying open-source projects.
Which one can I run on-premises?
Qodo is the most explicit: single-tenant SaaS or fully on-premises deployment with bring-your-own-LLM-key. CodeRabbit and Greptile both offer self-hosting at their Enterprise tiers, but with less public documentation, so confirm the specifics with their sales teams before assuming it clears your security review.
Is Qodo the same company as CodiumAI?
Yes. Qodo is CodiumAI's rebrand; the existing products and integrations carried over under the new name.
Which tool has the best false-positive rate?
None of the three publishes an independently audited false-positive rate as of August 2026. Any specific percentage you find in a third-party review should be treated as unverified until the vendor discloses its testing methodology. Run your own pilot on your own codebase instead โ it is the only number that describes your situation.
Do any of them have an affiliate programme?
Only CodeRabbit, through Dub, paying $30 per qualified developer signup โ that programme is live and checkable. Greptile's "Partners" page is a technology-integration list, and Qodo's "Super Qodoer" programme is a community ambassador stipend rather than commission on sales. PromptQuorum is not enrolled in any of them; the links on this page earn nothing.
Final Verdict
- Use CodeRabbit if you want the broadest Git platform coverage and predictable per-seat billing โ next step: start the 14-day trial, or point it at a public repository where it is free forever.
- Use Greptile if your codebase has deep cross-file dependencies and diff-only review keeps missing breakage โ next step: start on the free 50-credit tier and check whether it flags something your current review missed.
- Use Qodo if you need on-premises or single-tenant deployment with your own LLM key โ next step: book the Enterprise demo rather than starting on Pro Team, since on-prem is not what the $30 plan delivers.
- Skip all three if you ship fewer than five PRs a week โ next step: revisit when review turnaround, not review quality, becomes the bottleneck.