Comparison

Roam is its own category:
local-CLI agent-assurance.

Cloud-IDE agents (Cursor, Cody, Windsurf, Continue, Sweep, Claude Code) are human-first surfaces that log a session. Cloud semantic reviewers (CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo) read the diff as text on a vendor server. Roam is an agent-first CLI + MCP server that gates the change and emits proof — credential-free, zero network egress by default (opt-in metrics-push is the only outbound surface), and a portable tamper-evident ChangeEvidence packet (optionally cosign-signed) answering eight evidence questions per AI-assisted change. Among the products surveyed as of , we did not find a direct substitute for this trio. Vendor pages cited under methodology.

Try the 5-minute demo Architecture · Governance · Pricing

Three categories, three different questions

Before comparing vendor tables, name the category. These three product shapes answer different questions for different consumers. Comparing across categories is apples to oranges to evidence packets.

Cloud-IDE agent "Help me write code." Cursor, Sourcegraph Cody Enterprise, Windsurf, Continue, Sweep, Claude Code. Human-first IDE or CLI surface. Vendor account + cloud LLM endpoint required. Audit logs answer who ran what.
Cloud semantic reviewer "Does this PR make sense?" CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo, SonarQube Cloud. Reads the diff as text on a vendor server. Catches logic bugs, naming drift, intent mismatches. Source uploaded; self-host is enterprise-tier.
Local-CLI agent-assurance "Was this change structurally understood and recorded?" Roam. Agent-first CLI + MCP server. Local SQLite graph of symbols, callers, layers, runtime hot spots, clones; preflight + blast-radius + critique gates; portable ChangeEvidence packet answering eight evidence questions per change.

Roam composes with the other two categories — keep your IDE agent for code generation, keep your semantic reviewer for intent checks, add Roam underneath for the structural + evidence layer. A separate tier of MCP gateways (Lasso, Portkey, Interlock) sits between the agent and its tools; Roam emits evidence such gateways can consume — they are not direct comparisons. See the trio end-to-end: the canonical 5-minute demo walks install → health → preflight → critique → portable ChangeEvidence packet without leaving the laptop.

Inside review: four sub-layers, Roam owns two

Within the review half of the picture, four sub-layers answer different questions. A healthy setup runs all four; Roam covers the bottom two.

1. Semantic Does the code make sense? CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo. Reads the diff as text. Catches logic bugs, missing error paths, intent drift.
2. Static Does it violate rules? SonarQube, Semgrep, ast-grep, ESLint. Insecure patterns, taint violations, banned APIs. Rule-based and language-aware.
3. Structural What else does it touch? Roam. Reads the diff as a graph mutation: callers, tests, clones, runtime hot spots, layer violations, blast radius.
4. Algorithmic Is it correct but slow? Roam. Deterministic detectors for O(n²) nested-loop lookups, N+1 queries, regex compiled in hot loops, repeated JSON parses, quadratic string concat, branching recursion without memoisation — patterns AI agents ship that pass tests and fail at scale.

Roam adds structural + algorithmic review without replacing the semantic or static layers. The flat-tier pricing is intentional: add two review layers without a per-seat headcount conversation.

Side-by-side 1 of 2: against cloud semantic reviewers

CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo, and SonarQube focus on the cloud semantic reviewer category. Roam complements them with a local structural, algorithmic, and evidence layer. Each cell links to a vendor-page citation below; if we've mischaracterised a capability, email us and we'll update.

Roam compared with CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo, and SonarQube on nine product axes.
Roam CodeRabbit Greptile Qodo SonarQube
Reviews what the code touches (callers, layers, cycles) Yes Limited Limited Limited Yes
Reviews what the code does (semantics) Limited Yes Yes Yes Limited
Catches the clone-not-edited bug AI keeps shipping Yes Not advertised Not advertised Not advertised Not advertised
Runs locally — source never uploaded Yes Cloud* Cloud* Cloud* Yes (paid)
Tamper-evident review attestations (in-toto v1, cosign-verifiable) Yes Not advertised Not advertised Not advertised Not advertised
Exposes the code graph to agents via MCP Yes (server)*** Consumes MCP*** Consumes MCP*** Enterprise tier*** Yes (Oct 2025)***
Open source Apache 2.0 No No No Community ed.
Free tier for individuals Yes, forever Free tier Trial + OSS Developer tier Community ed.
Starting price (team tier) from $99/mo flat (additive to your semantic reviewer) $24/dev/mo** $30/seat/mo + usage $30/user/mo** from $32/mo (LOC-based)

*self-host or private deployment is vendor-specific and generally enterprise-scoped; **annual billing where listed (Qodo lists $38 monthly / $30 annual); ***Roam exposes the code graph as an MCP server (agents call roam tools directly); CodeRabbit lists MCP connections, Greptile lists external-app connections, Qodo lists Enterprise MCP tools, and SonarQube ships an MCP server plus Cloud-native MCP.

Side-by-side 2 of 2: against cloud-IDE agents

Cursor, Cody, Aider, Windsurf, Continue, Sweep, and Claude Code focus on the cloud-IDE-agent category — they write code with the developer. Roam runs underneath as a local assurance layer. Three axes — credentials required, network egress required, and primary audience — differ between Roam and the products in this cohort based on each vendor's public documentation.

Roam compared with Cursor, Cody, Aider, Windsurf, Continue, Sweep, and Claude Code on eight axes.
Roam Cursor Cody Aider Windsurf Continue Sweep Claude Code
Primary surface CLI + MCP IDE IDE + web CLI IDE + JetBrains IDE-agnostic JetBrains IDE CLI agent
Credentials required None Account + LLM tokens Enterprise contract1 LLM API key (BYOK) Account BYOK + OAuth Account Anthropic API key
Network egress required None Cloud agents Cloud or self-host + LLM LLM endpoint Optional (self-host)2 LLM endpoint Cloud-managed LLM endpoint
Audience AGENT-first (CLI fallback) HUMAN-first HUMAN-first HUMAN-first HUMAN-first HUMAN-first HUMAN-first AGENT-first
Compliance certifications4 Not currently certified; see /trust for posture3 SOC 2 (vendor-stated) SOC 2 + ISO 27001 (vendor portal) None advertised SOC 2 Type II + FedRAMP High + HIPAA (vendor-stated) None advertised SOC 2 (vendor-stated) None advertised
Audit / evidence shape HMAC run ledger + ChangeEvidence packet (8 questions) Enterprise audit logs Activity audit log git history only SSO/SCIM/RBAC + session audit None None advertised Session transcript
Structural depth Cycles, PageRank, Louvain, spectral, dark matter, world model, N+1, taint — 28 langs Embedding search Precise xref + cross-repo Tree-sitter repo map Codemaps (visual) Semantic search None visible Reads files
Roam relationship Complementary Complementary (enterprise tier) Complementary Complementary Consumes Roam via MCP Different surface (JetBrains) Consumes Roam via MCP

1Sourcegraph deprecated Cody Free + Pro on 2025-07-23. Cody now sits inside Sourcegraph's enterprise platform; the public pricing page lists an Enterprise plan starting at $16K rather than a self-serve seat price. Sourcegraph positions Amp as the consumer/team agentic successor. 2Windsurf supports cloud / hybrid / self-hosted deployment with offline install; the self-hosted path still contacts an LLM endpoint by default. 3Roam has no hosted service to certify: the CLI runs locally, and by default neither source, index, nor evidence leaves the developer's machine. Roam itself is not a substitute for a hosted vendor's compliance program — it can, however, produce artefacts that support evidence for SOC 2 CC8.1, ISO 42001, and similar AI-governance controls. 4Certification rows reflect each vendor's own public claims as of the verification date below — Roam has not independently audited any third-party certificate. Sources verified — see methodology below for full citations.

Methodology

Every cell in this table is a verifiable claim. Where we say "Limited" or "Not advertised", we mean we could not find the capability documented on the vendor's public pages as of the verification date below. If you're a vendor and we got something wrong, email hello@roam-code.com and we'll update.

Sources verified

How we mark each cell

  • Yes — capability documented on the vendor's marketing or docs page
  • Limited — partial capability documented, or the capability appears on enterprise-only or undocumented surfaces
  • Not advertised — we could not find the capability documented; this is verifiable via vendor pages above

Why "alongside", not "instead of"

Semantic review (CodeRabbit, Greptile, Qodo) reads the diff as text and asks does this make sense semantically?. Structural review (Roam) reads the diff as a graph mutation and asks what else does this touch?. Teams shipping AI-assisted changes often want both signals side by side.

Our pricing assumes you keep your existing reviewer: Roam Review at $99-$1,499/mo flat is additive to $24-30/dev/mo for the semantic reviewer, not a replacement. Flat tiers cap your Roam spend regardless of team size.

Try Roam alongside your current reviewer

Start with the canonical 5-minute demoinstall → health → preflight → critique → portable evidence packet, all locally. Or run the free 5-PR DIY sample on your repo: pip install roam-code && roam pr-replay --tier sample.

For a written report on your last 30 or 90 PRs scored against the current detector set, commission a paid PR Replay engagement — Team ($2,500) and Deep ($6,000) on /audit. 50% of the fee credits toward a Roam Review subscription within 60 days.