AI code review tools read each pull request and comment on bugs, risks and style before a person merges it.
This guide ranks twelve on setup effort, the bill once reviews are metered by credits, lines or seats, how rules can be exported, and whether a team can buy and leave without a platform vendor.
Vendors can pay for more visibility on this website, for example a higher place in a ranking or more room on a page. Commercial relationships can also affect which products we feature and how prominently. Every vendor link is marked the same, whatever the arrangement behind it. How that works.
In short
What AI code review tools software does
AI code review tools connect to a Git host, read each pull request, and post comments on defects, security issues and rule breaches, often with suggested fixes, before humans merge.
Ranking criteria for this AI code review tool list, applied top to bottom: effort to get started, cost in practice, data return, ability to leave, buyer fit. One rule overrides the order: smaller vendors take the first three places when the category offers them, and the best-known brands start at four. For why these five were chosen, and why nothing here gets a numeric score, see how we work.
Usage-based billing, each review drawn from team prepaid credit; no flat seat rate; docs point to the Cursor pricing page for rates
—
Teams already on Cursor wanting a bug-hunting reviewer on every pull request
Teams wanting a standalone reviewer with no editor vendor
Country is where the vendor is headquartered or contracts from, which is a different question from where your data is hosted. Where the two tell different stories, the entry says so.
Ranked #1 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Free tierSelf-hostablePublished pricingEurope
Sourcery lets you buy seats only for the developers you assign, and every paid plan starts with a 14-day trial of the Team tier. Pro covers private-repository review; Team adds nightly security scans of up to 50 repositories and analytics.
Review limits are described as higher on paid tiers but the numbers are not printed. The vendor says code is used only for the review, kept no copy afterwards, and never used to train a model.
What stands out
Per-developer seats
GitHub and GitLab
Public repos free
Where it costs you
The pricing page names GitHub and GitLab as integrations; Bitbucket and Azure DevOps do not appear there.
Self-hosting, SSO and bring-your-own LLM keys are listed only under the custom Enterprise plan, with no rate shown.
Right for
Teams on GitHub or GitLab wanting a predictable per-seat review bill
Wrong for
Teams hosting code on Bitbucket or Azure DevOps
United KingdomFree for public repositories; published per-developer monthly rates; 14-day trial without a card
Per-author AI review with a flat price and no review cap
Ranked #2 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Self-hostablePublished pricingNorth America
A Korbit user is defined as a git author, so a contractor who commits counts and an executive reading the dashboard does not. Pro includes Ask Korbit, a chat over the codebase, plus a management console and core Insights reports.
Max adds Slack delivery of Insights and a private support channel. The vendor says its Max tier costs nothing for open source repositories, a useful check before a public project pays.
What stands out
Per git author
Unlimited PR reviews
On-prem tier
Where it costs you
Pro lacks custom policies and the raised ceilings for big pull requests that Max provides.
On-premises installation is listed only under Enterprise, which has no printed rate.
Right for
Teams that count git authors and want review volume left uncapped
Wrong for
Companies on Azure DevOps or needing on-premises at small scale
CanadaPublished monthly rates per git author on two tiers; enterprise tier by contact; 14-day trial
Credit-priced review with context drawn across several repositories
Ranked #3 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Free tierSelf-hostablePublished pricingNorth America
The free Starter plan covers one active developer with fifty credits a month, enough to test it on a real repository. Pro adds learning and custom context, a knowledge base, cross-repository context, an analytics dashboard and links to Jira, Linear and Notion.
Qualified non-commercial projects under an OSI-approved licence can apply for free use, and pre-Series A startups get a larger monthly credit allowance for six months.
What stands out
Credit-based
No seat fees
Cross-repo context
Where it costs you
Cost scales per review depth: an Apex review costs ten credits against one for base.
Self-hosting and SSO are Enterprise features with custom pricing.
Right for
Small teams with many contributors where seat fees would dominate
Wrong for
Teams needing a fixed monthly cost they can forecast
United StatesFree for one developer with monthly credits; published pay-per-credit rate with no seat fees; 14-day trial
Pull request review plus a triage queue and merge checks
Ranked #4 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Self-hostablePublished pricingElsewhere
The FAQ says there is no total limit on pull requests or repositories, but each plan carries a per-developer hourly allowance under a fair-usage policy; usage-based reviews can continue after it.
Triage ranks the pull request queue by value and risk and is sold from the second tier. Self-hosted CodeRabbit runs the review agent in your infrastructure for Enterprise customers on GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps and Bitbucket Data Center.
What stands out
Three paid tiers
Pre-merge checks
Self-hosted Enterprise
Where it costs you
The entry tier omits unit-test generation, finishing touches and post-merge actions.
The Essentials comparison lists a single linked repository and five reviews per developer per hour.
Right for
Teams wanting review, merge gates and queue triage in one product
Wrong for
Small teams that want every feature at the lowest tier
Not stated by the vendorPublished per-user monthly rates on three tiers; custom enterprise tier; 14-day trial; public repositories reviewed at no charge
Credit-metered review with rules learned from your history
Ranked #5 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Self-hostablePublished pricingMiddle East
The smallest pack is 2,500 credits at a stated rate per credit, about eighteen reviews a month; larger packs reach about 144. Overage runs at the same rate under a monthly cap the customer sets.
Pro Team includes unlimited rules, Git and IDE integrations, pre-pull-request review skills and a dashboard. Cross-repository capabilities are included, whereas the self-learning system and Gerrit support are listed for Enterprise only.
What stands out
Credit packs
Rules system
On-prem Enterprise
Where it costs you
The vendor says it offers no permanent entry plan, so reviews stop when the trial ends unless a pack is bought.
Each pack is metered in credits, which the page converts to roughly eighteen reviews a month for the smallest pack.
Right for
Teams up to thirty developers that want rules enforced on every pull request
Wrong for
Teams that want an always-on entry plan for hobby projects
IsraelPublished credit packs pooled across the team; no permanent entry plan; 14-day trial without a card
Review billed by seat with a monthly allowance of lines
Ranked #6 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Self-hostablePublished pricingNorth America
Bito reviews in Git, the IDE and the CLI, across GitHub, GitLab and Bitbucket, with one-click application of suggested fixes. The Team tier promises a 24-hour response on business days; Professional adds a response every day and a 14-day trial without a card.
Fair-usage limits apply to both. The line allowance makes cost depend on code churn, so estimate monthly changed lines from your repository history before choosing a tier.
What stands out
Per-seat plus lines
Git, IDE and CLI
Self-hosted add-on
Where it costs you
Each seat includes a fixed number of lines a month, with overage charged per thousand lines.
Custom review guidelines, Jira and CI pipeline reviews are absent from the entry tier.
Right for
Teams that review small pull requests and want seat-based billing
Wrong for
Teams merging large generated diffs every single day
United StatesPublished per-seat monthly rates on two tiers with extra lines billed by volume; custom enterprise tier; 14-day trial
Stacked pull requests with AI review and a merge queue
Ranked #7 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Free tierPublished pricingNorth America
The free Hobby tier covers personal-account repositories with limited chat and AI reviews. Starter extends to organisation repositories and adds Slack notifications and team insights. Team adds the merge queue, automations and unlimited reviews.
Enterprise lists GitHub Enterprise Server support, SAML, audit logs and a custom MSA. A banner on the site says Cursor cloud agents are now inside Graphite, a first sign of the Cursor tie-up.
What stands out
Stacked PRs
Merge queue
Cursor deal
Where it costs you
Unlimited AI reviews and review customisation start at the Team tier; the free tier has limited AI reviews.
The pricing page speaks of GitHub repositories only, with no GitLab or Bitbucket listed.
Right for
GitHub teams that also want stacked pull requests and a merge queue
Wrong for
Teams hosted on GitLab, Bitbucket or Azure DevOps
United StatesFree hobby tier; published per-user monthly rates on two paid tiers with annual discount; custom enterprise tier
A cloud agent platform where review is one configurable use
Ranked #8 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Published pricingNorth America
Both offerings run the full feature set with no tiers: managed SaaS, or deployment into your own AWS account where code, credentials and model calls stay inside it. Agents have per-session and per-day budgets and triggers from GitHub, Linear, Slack and Sentry events.
Support is optional and sold as monthly packages with response targets of forty-eight, twenty-four or four hours, which matters for enterprises needing a direct line.
What stands out
Usage-based
YAML agents
Runs in your AWS VPC
Where it costs you
Review is defined by you in YAML; the platform sells agents, not a finished reviewer.
Billing is tokens plus CPU and memory time, so the monthly figure follows usage.
Right for
Engineering teams wanting custom review agents with budgets per session
Wrong for
Teams wanting a plug-in reviewer working within minutes
United StatesPublished usage rates: model tokens at cost plus a platform fee, no per-seat fees; optional paid support packages
Quality and security scanning with an AI reviewer on pull requests
Ranked #9 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Free tierPublished pricingEurope
In this market Codacy reads as a broad platform with an AI reviewer inside it, not a reviewer sold alone. The Team rate starts at 18 USD per developer with yearly billing, and merge gates and coverage reports come with it.
Business adds DAST, container scanning, custom rules, SSO and audit logs, and is also sold through AWS Marketplace. Check your Git host first, because the supported list is short.
What stands out
Quality and security
Merge gates
Cloud Git hosts only
Where it costs you
The pricing FAQ names only GitHub, Bitbucket and GitLab clouds, so a team on its own Git server cannot connect.
Team is capped at thirty developers, so a growing company reaches a sales conversation early.
Right for
Companies on a vendor-run Git cloud that want an AI reviewer bundled with a wider quality platform
Wrong for
Teams that run their own Git servers or keep repositories in Azure Repos
PortugalFree IDE tier; published per-developer monthly rates on the team tier; custom business tier quoted by sales
Review, scanning and pentesting sold as separate products
Ranked #10 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Self-hostablePricing on requestNorth America
The site lists line-by-line reviews on every pull request alongside SAST, SCA, secrets and infrastructure-as-code scanning, quality gates and dead-code checks. Integrations named are GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps, Jira and Slack.
The Enterprise page describes deployment fully on-premises or inside an AWS, GCP or Azure environment, with zero data retention, SSO and audit logs. The pentest plan lists one full scan as included.
What stands out
Review plus security
Azure DevOps
VPC or on-prem
Where it costs you
Plan prices on the pricing page load by script, so they could not be read from the page source.
The buying conversation spreads into security and pentesting, because the vendor packages several products.
Right for
Teams wanting pull request review and security scanning from one vendor
Wrong for
Buyers who only need a plain pull request reviewer
United StatesPer-product plans shown on the pricing page; 14-day trial without a card; discount for qualifying public projects
Static analysis and AI review billed partly by lines processed
Ranked #11 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Free tierSelf-hostablePublished pricingNorth America
DeepSource splits the bill in two: 24 USD per user each month on yearly billing, plus AI review at 8 USD per 10K lines on Standard or 15 USD on Advanced once the 100 USD credit runs out.
A 14-day trial carries up to 50 USD of credit and needs no card. Open-source projects get 1,000 reviewed pull requests a month. Bring-your-own keys for Claude, OpenAI or Gemini sit in Enterprise.
What stands out
Per user plus metering
Autofix
Owned by Harness
Where it costs you
AI review beyond the bundled yearly credit is billed per ten thousand processed lines, so the monthly cost follows code volume.
Harness bought the company in September 2026, so features are due to move into that platform.
Right for
Teams that want to trial AI review on a metered bill and keep static analysis and formatting alongside it
Wrong for
Buyers who want one flat seat price with no usage meter
United StatesPublished per-user monthly rate with annual billing plus metered AI review; free plan for public repositories; custom enterprise tier
Bug-focused pull request review sold through a Cursor team account
Ranked #12 of 12 in Best AI Code Review Tools in 2026.
Pricing on requestNorth America
Bugbot runs on every pull request update or when someone comments cursor review. Rules can come from team settings, repositories or BUGBOT.md files, and it learns rules from merged or closed pull requests, each learning run counting as usage.
It reads existing pull request comments to avoid repeating a point. The docs say it processes data under the same privacy rules as other Cursor requests and skips files that look like credentials.
What stands out
Usage-based
Effort levels
Cursor team account
Where it costs you
Billing is per review with no flat seat rate, so the monthly cost follows pull request volume.
Effort levels are available only on usage-based Bugbot plans, and Bugbot is bought through a Cursor team.
Right for
Teams already on Cursor wanting a bug-hunting reviewer on every pull request
Wrong for
Teams wanting a standalone reviewer with no editor vendor
United StatesUsage-based billing, each review drawn from team prepaid credit; no flat seat rate; docs point to the Cursor pricing page for rates
AI code review tools connect to a Git host, read each pull request, and post comments on defects, security issues and rule breaches, often with suggested fixes, before humans merge. Products in this area look alike on a feature list, so we would decide these questions first.
01
Check who publishes a price
The split is 10 published against 2 quoted. If you want to compare numbers first, start with Sourcery, Korbit, Greptile, CodeRabbit, Qodo, Bito, Graphite, Ellipsis, Codacy, DeepSource.
02
Look at where the vendor sits
The 12 companies behind this list are established in 6 countries, by region North America 8, Europe 2, Middle East 1, Elsewhere 1. Disclosure obligations attach to the company, so they travel with the vendor even when the servers stay at home.
How much does an AI code review tool cost once reviews are metered?
The sticker price of an AI code review tool rarely predicts the invoice, because vendors meter different things. Sourcery and Korbit charge per developer, with Korbit counting git authors and allowing unlimited reviews. Greptile charges one dollar a credit, and a deep Apex review uses ten credits against one for a base review.
Qodo sells pooled credit packs, Bito includes five thousand lines per seat before charging per thousand lines, and DeepSource charges AI review by processed lines after the included annual credit. Cursor Bugbot draws each review from prepaid credit. Take last quarter's pull request count and average diff size, then price each tool on that history.
Export last quarter's merged pull request count and average changed lines
Ask each vendor what counts as one review, including re-runs after a push
Check whether overage is capped or runs on silently
Which AI code review tools run inside your own infrastructure?
Few AI code review tools let code stay inside your network, and most gate it behind the top plan. Greptile puts a self-hosted install, SSO and on-premises Git hosts under Enterprise; Sourcery lists self-hosting and bring-your-own LLM keys; Qodo lists single-tenant SaaS and on-premises or air-gapped deployment; CodeRabbit offers self-hosted CodeRabbit to Enterprise customers.
DeepSource puts self-hosting and its own-keys option in Enterprise, while Ellipsis can deploy into your AWS VPC without a tier jump, billed as usage plus your AWS costs. Bito sells self-hosting as a per-seat add-on. If a security review forbids sending diffs to a vendor, this single question removes about half the field before any demo is booked.
Confirm which plan unlocks the self-hosted option and whether it has a printed price
Ask whether the model runs in your account or the vendor's
Check that bring-your-own model keys are supported if policy requires them
Will an AI code review tool work with your Git host?
Git host support separates these tools more than review quality does. Codacy's FAQ names GitHub Cloud, GitLab Cloud and Bitbucket Cloud as the only providers, excluding on-premise Git and Azure Repos. Graphite's pricing speaks of GitHub repositories only. Sourcery names GitHub and GitLab, Korbit adds Bitbucket, and CodeAnt AI lists Azure DevOps among its integrations.
Cursor Bugbot reaches GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps and Cursor's own hosting. Hosts running on your own servers need a separate check on each tool, since GitHub Enterprise Server or Bitbucket Data Center is often another tier. Connect a throwaway repository during the trial and watch what the tool posts on a real merge request, including how it handles forks.
List every repository host and version your teams use today
Test one pull request on the exact host, not a sample project
Check whether enterprise server support needs a higher plan
Is an AI code review tool still independent after an acquisition?
This market is consolidating quickly, and the owner changes what you are buying. DeepSource announced on 9 September 2026 that Harness had acquired it, and says its features will move into the Harness platform. Graphite announced a definitive agreement to be acquired by Cursor, which says it will operate independently, and Cursor itself states it is now a part of SpaceX.
Cursor Bugbot is sold only through a Cursor team account, so its owner is also your editor vendor. By contrast Sourcery, Korbit, Greptile and CodeRabbit each present review as the main product on their pricing pages. Ownership matters at renewal, since product bundling, pricing and data terms can change after a deal. Write the owner into your vendor file and ask for notice of change in control.
Check each vendor's blog for acquisition notices before signing
Ask for a change-of-control clause that lets you exit
Confirm review rules and settings can be exported if you leave
What goes wrong most often when buying AI code review tools software
Judging tools on a demo pull request instead of replaying two weeks of your own merged ones, where the real false-alarm rate shows.
Buying seats for the whole engineering department when only the developers who open pull requests are counted by Korbit or Sourcery.
Assuming the entry tier includes the rules engine, when Bito and CodeRabbit place custom guidelines and test generation on higher tiers.
Ignoring who owns the vendor, then finding at renewal that DeepSource or Graphite is now folded into a bigger platform.
07
Frequently asked questions
7 answers
What is the best AI code review tools in 2026?
Sourcery takes first place among the 12 we reviewed. Sourcery.AI Limited describes itself as a company based in the United Kingdom, and it sells one thing: review of pull requests and merge requests.
Paid plans are priced per assigned developer, so the bill does not move with review volume. Bitbucket and Azure DevOps are not on its pricing page, and self-hosting, bring-your-own model keys and GitHub Enterprise Server sit only in the custom Enterprise tier.
Which AI code review tools publish their pricing?
The ones that do, with the model each states:
Sourcery: Free for public repositories; published per-developer monthly rates; 14-day trial without a card.
Korbit: Published monthly rates per git author on two tiers; enterprise tier by contact; 14-day trial.
Greptile: Free for one developer with monthly credits; published pay-per-credit rate with no seat fees; 14-day trial.
CodeRabbit: Published per-user monthly rates on three tiers; custom enterprise tier; 14-day trial; public repositories reviewed at no charge.
Qodo: Published credit packs pooled across the team; no permanent entry plan; 14-day trial without a card.
Bito: Published per-seat monthly rates on two tiers with extra lines billed by volume; custom enterprise tier; 14-day trial.
Graphite: Free hobby tier; published per-user monthly rates on two paid tiers with annual discount; custom enterprise tier.
Ellipsis: Published usage rates: model tokens at cost plus a platform fee, no per-seat fees; optional paid support packages.
Codacy: Free IDE tier; published per-developer monthly rates on the team tier; custom business tier quoted by sales.
DeepSource: Published per-user monthly rate with annual billing plus metered AI review; free plan for public repositories; custom enterprise tier.
The other 2 quote per organisation.
Is there a free AI code review tool?
Sourcery, Greptile, Graphite, Codacy, DeepSource can be used for free, either as a free plan or a self-hosted edition.
Where are these AI code review tool vendors established?
The headquarters are spread over 6 countries and 4 regions, North America 8, Europe 2, Middle East 1, Elsewhere 1:
Sourcery: United Kingdom.
Korbit: Canada.
Greptile: United States.
CodeRabbit: Not stated by the vendor.
Qodo: Israel.
Bito: United States.
Graphite: United States.
Ellipsis: United States.
Codacy: Portugal.
CodeAnt AI: United States.
DeepSource: United States.
Cursor Bugbot: United States.
Which AI code review tools can you host yourself?
Sourcery, Korbit, Greptile, CodeRabbit, Qodo, Bito, CodeAnt AI, DeepSource. The other 4 are hosted by the vendor only.
What should you use instead of Sourcery?
Korbit and Greptile are the next two on this page. Korbit is for teams that count git authors and want review volume left uncapped; Greptile is for small teams with many contributors where seat fees would dominate.
Who should not buy Sourcery?
Teams hosting code on Bitbucket or Azure DevOps. The pricing page names GitHub and GitLab as integrations; Bitbucket and Azure DevOps do not appear there..
Do you make a AI code review tools product that is not listed here? Describe what it does and who buys it. We decide on inclusion, a listing cannot be bought, and the details are under software advice.
