By Alex Mercer · Updated
Best AI code review tools in 2026, ranked
As of Oct 10, 2026, the three highest-scoring AI code review tools are cubic, Kody AI and Greptile. On Martian’s Code Review Bench, which scores review bots on real open-source pull requests, they sit at 64.0, 63.4 and 63.2 F1 in the last-month view. The gap between first and third is 0.8 F1 points. CodeRabbit (61.8) and Claude (60.9) come next.
This page belongs to cubic (cubic.dev), an AI code review tool, and cubic is #1 on that board, so weigh our view accordingly. Every price, Git platform and data policy below comes from the vendors’ own pages, read on Oct 10, 2026.
Use the ranking as a shortlist: take the two highest-ranked tools that fit your Git host and budget, and run both on a week of your own pull requests.
The ranking at a glance
Ranked by F1 on Martian’s Code Review Bench, last-month view, checked Oct 10, 2026. “Starting price” is the cheapest way to get automatic PR reviews as of Oct 10, 2026.
| Rank | Tool | F1 (Oct 10) | Git platforms | Starting price | Free option | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | cubic | 64.0 | GitHub | $30/dev/mo yearly ($40 monthly) | 20 PR reviews a month; free on public repos | GitHub teams wanting the top-ranked reviewer |
| 2 | Kody AI | 63.4 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | $8/dev/mo yearly ($10 monthly) + model costs | Community edition on your own model key | Self-hosting with your own model keys |
| 3 | Greptile | 63.2 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket | $30/dev/mo with 50 credits, then $1 a credit | 1 developer, 50 credits a month | GitLab or Bitbucket teams that may self-host |
| 4 | CodeRabbit | 61.8 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | $24/dev/mo yearly ($30 monthly) | PR summaries only; free on public repos | One reviewer across every Git host |
| 5 | Claude | 60.9 | GitHub | Team plan ($20/seat/mo yearly) + ~$15-25 a review | None | Rare deep reviews on Claude Team or Enterprise |
| 6 | Devin | 60.7 | GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, Bitbucket Data Center | Usage-based after a 2-week trial | Free on open-source repos | Existing Devin users |
| 7 | GitHub Copilot | 59.9 | GitHub, Azure DevOps (preview) | Pro $10/mo or Business $19/seat, plus usage | Not on Copilot Free | Existing Copilot customers |
| 8 | Macroscope | 59.6 | GitHub | $0.05 per KB reviewed ($0.50 minimum) | $100 starting credit | GitHub teams that prefer paying per use |
| 9 | Cursor Bugbot | 58.0 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket (Cloud in beta), Azure DevOps (beta) | Cursor plan from $20/mo + ~$1.00-1.50 a run | None confirmed | Teams already coding in Cursor |
| 10 | Qodo | 57.7 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | $30/mo for ~18 reviews, shared by the team | 14-day trial; open-source program | On-prem, air-gapped or Gerrit setups |
| 11 | Kilo Code | 57.5 | GitHub, GitLab | Your model costs; Teams $15/user/mo | Free with Kilo’s free models | Teams that pick their own model |
| 12 | Gitar | 56.7 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | $20/user/mo yearly ($25 monthly) | 14-day trial; free for open source | Teams that also want CI failures fixed |
| 13 | Codex (ChatGPT) | 55.6 | GitHub, GitLab (beta) | ChatGPT Plus, $20/mo | Not on ChatGPT Free or Go | Teams already on paid ChatGPT plans |
| 14 | Gemini Code Assist | 52.0 | GitHub | No published price | None; the free app shut down July 17, 2026 | Existing Gemini Code Assist customers |
| 15 | CodeAnt AI | 48.7 | GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | $24/user/mo yearly ($30 monthly) | 14-day trial with 100 reviews | Buyers mainly after security scanning |
Not on the benchmark
Martian’s last-month view doesn’t rank these four:
- Graphite: stacked PRs and a merge queue with AI review, GitHub only, from $20 per user a month billed yearly (unlimited AI reviews start on the $40 Team plan); Cursor agreed to buy it in December 2025.
- Codacy: code quality and security scanning from $18 per developer a month billed yearly, free for open source, with an AI Reviewer that works on GitHub only. See cubic vs Codacy.
- Sourcery: AI review for GitHub and GitLab from $12 per developer a month billed yearly, free on public repositories. See cubic vs Sourcery.
- DeepSource: static analysis plus AI review on all four major Git hosts, from $24 per user a month billed yearly plus AI review billed by lines processed; Harness acquired it on September 9, 2026.
How we ranked them
Martian, which calls itself a research lab that “doesn’t train models or sell coding tools”, runs the Code Review Bench. Its online tracker follows review bots on open-source pull requests and uses an LLM judge to match each bot comment against what the developer changed afterward.
We used its default view: the month to Oct 10, 2026, 15 tools and 17,505 scored pull requests, ranked by F1. F1 combines how many of the real issues a reviewer catches with how many of its comments developers act on.
Three cautions:
- It moves daily. The window rolls forward each day, and several vendors have claimed #1 at different times. Greptile did on July 30, 2026.
- Close scores are close. Martian warns that direct tool-to-tool comparison is unreliable: bots on one repository see each other’s comments, and different kinds of repositories pick different tools. Samples differ too. Martian scored 155 of Kody AI’s pull requests in this window, against 777 to 2,497 for each other tool (1,528 for cubic).
- F1 isn’t the whole decision. A reviewer that doesn’t support your Git host, budget or data rules is out, whatever it scores. Try the top two that fit on your own PRs.
The tools, one by one
1. cubic
What it’s like: cubic reviews each pull request in the repositories you pick, comments on lines it thinks need a change and writes a summary of the PR. You add team rules in plain English, and it learns from replies, reactions and the past review comments of senior engineers you choose.
Where it stands out: It’s #1 on Martian’s last-month view. Seats pool their reviewed-line allowance, so one busy author doesn’t run out while a teammate’s lines sit unused, and reviews of new commits count only the new lines. On Pro and Max, Fix with cubic pushes a fix to the PR branch.
Watch out for: It reviews GitHub only, so GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps teams can’t use it. There’s no self-hosted version, and its SOC 2 report is Type 1, not Type 2.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Starter is free with 20 PR reviews a month per GitHub organization. Team costs $30, Pro $79 and Max $160 per developer a month billed yearly ($40, $99 and $200 monthly). Public repositories are free within fair-use limits, and the 7-day trial needs no card.
Platforms: GitHub.
Read more: our guide to AI code review and cubic’s plans.
2. Kody AI (Kodus)
What it’s like: Kody is the review agent from Kodus, built on an open-source core. It posts inline suggestions and an optional PR summary, and it can approve or request changes if you turn that on. Kody Rules, which can import your coding agents’ rule files, and @kody remember shape later reviews.
Where it stands out: You control cost and hosting: bring your own model key and pay the provider directly, with no markup, and self-host the free Community edition with Docker Compose or Helm.
Watch out for: Your bill is the Kodus seat plus model usage, which grows with PR volume, diff size and model choice. Kodus says reactions to its comments don’t change future reviews today; only rules and memories do.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Community is free on your own key, self-hosted or in Kodus’s cloud. Teams costs $8 per developer a month billed yearly ($10 monthly), plus model costs, with a 14-day trial and no card.
Platforms: GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps and Forgejo/Gitea, plus GitLab Self-Managed, Bitbucket Data Center and GitHub Enterprise Server (beta).
Read more: kodus.io.
3. Greptile
What it’s like: Greptile builds a graph of each repository’s functions, classes and dependencies, then reviews every PR against it. A review opens with a summary, a diagram and a 0-5 confidence score, and inline comments carry P0, P1 or P2 badges, most with a suggested change.
Where it stands out: It covers GitLab and Bitbucket as well as GitHub, and Enterprise adds self-hosting, air-gapped if needed, with your own model provider. Rules live in .greptile/ folders next to the code they cover.
Watch out for: You pay per review. Pro includes 50 credits per developer a month; a Base review costs 1 credit, the deeper Plus and Apex reviews 3 and 10, and re-reviews count again. On its cloud, Greptile may train on de-identified data unless you opt out.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Starter is free for one developer with 50 credits a month. Pro costs $30 per developer a month with 50 credits each, then $1 a credit, with a 14-day trial. Non-commercial open-source projects can apply to use it free.
Platforms: GitHub, GitLab and Bitbucket; GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab Self-Managed, Bitbucket Data Center and Gitea on Enterprise. No Azure DevOps.
Read more: CodeRabbit vs Greptile and Greptile alternatives.
4. CodeRabbit
What it’s like: CodeRabbit summarizes each PR, then leaves inline comments, many with a one-click fix, and runs linters and scanners such as ESLint, Ruff and Semgrep alongside the model. In .coderabbit.yaml you can switch its default chill profile to assertive for more feedback.
Where it stands out: It covers every major Git host, cloud and self-managed. Public repositories get its Team features free.
Watch out for: Reviews are capped per developer per hour, from 5 on Essentials, and the cap tightens for developers with many reviews in the past week. Self-hosting needs Enterprise with at least 500 seats, and the Free plan only summarizes PRs.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Essentials costs $24 per developer a month billed yearly ($30 monthly), Team $48 ($60) and Advanced $72 ($90), counting only developers who open PRs. The trial runs 14 days with no card.
Platforms: GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps, including GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab self-managed and Bitbucket Data Center.
Read more: our CodeRabbit review and cubic vs CodeRabbit.
5. Claude (Anthropic’s Code Review)
What it’s like: Anthropic’s managed Code Review runs a fleet of agents over each GitHub PR on Anthropic’s servers, verifies their findings and comments inline by severity. Reviews take about 20 minutes on average and never approve or block a merge. CLAUDE.md and a review-only REVIEW.md tune it. Martian scores the reviews the Claude GitHub app posts.
Where it stands out: Depth on large, risky changes, for teams already on Claude Team or Enterprise.
Watch out for: The price. Anthropic puts the average at $15-25 a review in usage credits, and reviewing every push multiplies that. For most teams it isn’t worth paying for. Run Claude Code’s /code-review command on your branch instead, which works on any plan that includes Claude Code.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Requires Claude Team ($20 per standard seat a month billed yearly, $25 monthly) or Enterprise, plus usage averaging $15-25 a review. It’s labeled a research preview.
Platforms: GitHub, including GitHub Enterprise Server.
Read more: our Claude Code review guide.
6. Devin
What it’s like: Devin Review is a review page in Cognition’s Devin app. It regroups a PR’s diff by what changed, flags bugs by confidence and security issues by CWE class, and syncs your comments and approvals back to GitHub. Auto-review runs when a PR opens and on every new commit unless you limit it.
Where it stands out: Large PRs. The regrouped diff and a chat that knows your codebase help a person read a change too big to go through line by line.
Watch out for: Since April 2026, reviews bill as usage after a two-week trial, in ACUs or dollars, with a size label on each PR showing what it cost. By default Cognition may train on your data; paid plans can opt out.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Devin Pro costs $20 a month, Max $200, and Teams $80 a month plus $40 per full seat; Enterprise is custom. Devin Review is usage-based after its trial and free on open-source repositories.
Platforms: GitHub and GitLab, including GitHub Enterprise Server and self-managed GitLab; Bitbucket Data Center; Azure DevOps through an Enterprise account. Not Bitbucket Cloud.
Read more: Devin Review docs.
7. GitHub Copilot
What it’s like: Add Copilot as a reviewer, or turn on automatic reviews, and it leaves a comment review with suggested fixes you can apply in a couple of clicks and an overview saying whether it thinks the PR is ready to approve. By default that review doesn’t count toward required approvals. You steer it with .github/copilot-instructions.md, path-specific instruction files or AGENTS.md.
Where it stands out: If you already pay for Copilot, there’s no new vendor to add, and, in public preview, it can hand a fix to Copilot’s cloud agent.
Watch out for: Since June 1, 2026, each review costs AI credits plus, on private repositories, GitHub Actions minutes. GitHub estimates $0.05-1 of credits per review at Lite effort and $0.25-5 at Balanced, the default. Since April 24, 2026, GitHub may also train on Free, Pro, Pro+ and Max users’ interactions unless they opt out.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Pro costs $10 a month, Pro+ $39 and Max $100; Business costs $19 and Enterprise $39 per seat a month. Plans include AI credits, and reviews beyond them are billed. Copilot Free doesn’t include PR review.
Platforms: GitHub; Azure DevOps in public preview.
Read more: our Copilot code review guide and cubic vs GitHub Copilot.
8. Macroscope
What it’s like: Macroscope walks your code’s syntax tree, posts inline comments with suggested diffs and writes the PR summary into the description. Its Fix It For Me feature opens a fix PR and iterates until CI passes, and Approvability can auto-approve low-risk PRs.
Where it stands out: You pay for work, not seats: $0.05 per KB of diff reviewed, with per-review and per-PR caps you set.
Watch out for: It reviews GitHub only, and the bill follows diff size: a 40 KB diff costs $2 per review pass. Its pages don’t mention self-hosting.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): $0.05 per KB reviewed, with a $0.50 minimum per review, and new workspaces get $100 of free usage. Non-commercial open-source projects can apply to use it free.
Platforms: GitHub.
Read more: Macroscope pricing.
9. Cursor Bugbot
What it’s like: Bugbot posts a summary and inline comments with suggested fixes, each with a link to fix it in Cursor. Its check stays neutral unless you make unresolved findings fail it. Autofix sends a cloud agent to push the fix, up to three attempts per PR. Rules live in .cursor/BUGBOT.md, and Bugbot learns more from your reactions and replies.
Where it stands out: Findings land where Cursor teams already write code, and it covers all four major Git hosts.
Watch out for: Two bills. You need a paid Cursor plan, and since May 2026 reviews also bill as usage, at an average of $1.00-1.50 a run by Cursor’s figures. On individual plans it reviews only PRs you wrote.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): A paid Cursor plan, from Pro at $20 a month or Teams at $40 per user a month, then usage.
Platforms: GitHub, including Enterprise Server; GitLab on paid GitLab tiers; Bitbucket, with Cloud in public beta; Azure DevOps Services, in public beta.
Read more: our Cursor Bugbot review and cubic vs Cursor Bugbot.
10. Qodo
What it’s like: Qodo opens with a summary, a walkthrough and a diagram, then lists findings by severity: bugs, rule violations and gaps against the linked ticket’s requirements. Small single-file fixes get a one-click button. It reads rules from files you already have, such as AGENTS.md and CLAUDE.md, and a Rule Miner, in beta, proposes more from your PR history.
Where it stands out: Enterprise reach: all four major Git hosts, plus Gerrit and single-tenant, on-prem or air-gapped deployment on Enterprise. Its pricing page says plainly that it doesn’t train on your code.
Watch out for: There’s no free plan after the 14-day trial, and billing follows review volume: $30 a month buys about 18 reviews for the whole team, credits expire monthly, and bigger PRs use more.
Price (Oct 10, 2026): Pro Team credit packs cost $30, $60 or $240 a month (about 18, 36 or 144 reviews), billed monthly, and extra credits $0.012 each. Enterprise, for 30 or more users, is on request. Open-source projects with 200+ GitHub stars can apply for free access.
Platforms: GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps; Gerrit on Enterprise.
Read more: cubic vs Qodo.
11. Kilo Code
Kilo Code, an MIT-licensed open-source coding agent, reviews GitHub and GitLab pull requests with whichever model you pick, guided by a REVIEW.md file. Kilo says reviews are free with its free models; otherwise you pay the model provider’s rates, with no markup. kilo.ai
12. Gitar
Gitar reviews pull requests on all four major Git hosts, diagnoses failing CI and pushes fixes to the branch, and Sonar, the company behind SonarQube, acquired it on May 21, 2026. Core costs $20 per user a month billed yearly ($25 monthly), and open-source projects can apply for its Pro features free. Gitar pricing
13. Codex (ChatGPT Codex Connector)
OpenAI’s Codex reviews GitHub pull requests on ChatGPT Plus ($20 a month) and higher plans, posts only P0 and P1 findings as a comment review, and supports GitLab in beta. Reviews draw on a separate code review allowance whose size OpenAI doesn’t publish. Our Codex code review guide
14. Gemini Code Assist
Google shut down its free consumer GitHub reviewer on July 17, 2026, and stopped selling new Gemini Code Assist Standard and Enterprise subscriptions after October 9, 2026. Its enterprise GitHub reviewer is still a preview, set up through Google Cloud with no published price; check with Google before planning around it. Google’s docs
15. CodeAnt AI
CodeAnt AI sells security first (its homepage title is “The Exploit-Based Agentic Security Platform”) and AI code review as one plan: $24 per user a month billed yearly ($30 monthly), all four major Git hosts, on-prem or VPC deployment on Enterprise, and a trust page that says it never stores or trains on your code. It’s last on Martian’s board at 48.7 F1, so it fits teams buying the security scanning who want review in the same tool. codeant.ai
How to choose an AI code review tool
Your Git host cuts the list fastest. cubic, Claude, Macroscope and Gemini Code Assist review GitHub only. Kody AI, CodeRabbit, Qodo, Gitar and CodeAnt AI also cover GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps, and the rest cover some of them; the table above has the detail.
Your budget per developer. Entry seat plans run $8 to $30 per developer a month. Usage-priced tools such as Macroscope, Bugbot, Qodo, Devin and Claude’s managed review cost more as PRs grow or multiply.
Self-hosting. Kody AI’s free Community edition runs on your own servers. Greptile, Qodo, Devin and CodeAnt AI offer self-hosted or VPC deployment on Enterprise, and CodeRabbit does from 500 seats. cubic, Copilot, Claude’s managed review and Codex don’t offer it.
Data handling. Ask whether a vendor trains on your code and whether it keeps it. Qodo, Kody AI, CodeAnt AI, Gitar, Macroscope and Gemini say they don’t train on it, nor do Claude’s Team and Enterprise plans by default, and cubic’s model providers are contractually barred from it. Greptile (on de-identified data), Devin, Copilot’s individual plans, ChatGPT Plus and Pro, and Cursor without Privacy Mode may, unless you opt out. Greptile caches code until you revoke access, CodeRabbit keeps it only with review caching on, and Kody AI, CodeAnt AI and Gitar say they don’t store it.
Team rules and learning. Almost every tool here reads a rules file. Several also learn from feedback or review history, including cubic, CodeRabbit, Greptile, Bugbot, Qodo and Kody AI, and cubic learns from the past review comments of senior engineers you choose.
Fixes. Fix with cubic (Pro and Max) and Bugbot’s Autofix push fixes to the branch, Macroscope and Gitar iterate until CI passes, and CodeRabbit, Qodo and Copilot offer one-click fixes or hand-offs to a coding agent.
The short version:
- Pick cubic if you’re on GitHub and want the top-ranked reviewer.
- Pick CodeRabbit if you need one reviewer across all four major Git hosts.
- Pick Greptile if you’re on GitLab or Bitbucket and may self-host later.
- Pick Kody AI if you want open source, self-hosting and your own model keys.
- Pick Qodo if you need on-prem, air-gapped or Gerrit.
- Pick GitHub Copilot if you already pay for it and want a second pass.
- Pick Cursor Bugbot if your team already works in Cursor.
What AI code review tools cost
Three pricing models dominate. Per-seat entry plans run $8 to $30 per developer a month. Usage pricing charges for the work: Macroscope $0.05 per KB of diff, Bugbot about $1.00-1.50 a run, Qodo credit packs from $30 a month for the team, and Claude’s managed review $15-25 a review on average. A third group comes bundled with a plan you may already pay for: GitHub Copilot, Codex in ChatGPT, and Bugbot in Cursor.
For scale, take a 10-developer team that opens 200 PRs a month. On yearly billing it pays $240 a month for CodeRabbit Essentials or $300 for cubic Team, as long as its PRs fit each plan’s limits. The same 200 reviews would cost $3,000-5,000 in usage at Claude’s average, on top of about $200 a month for ten Claude Team seats. Our guide to AI code review pricing works through more team sizes, and free AI code review tools covers the free tiers.
More on AI code review
Guides
Tool reviews
Questions and answers
- What is the best AI code review tool?
- On Martian’s Code Review Bench (last-month view, checked Oct 10, 2026), cubic is #1 at 64.0 F1, with Kody AI at 63.4 and Greptile at 63.2. cubic is our product and reviews GitHub only. On GitLab, Bitbucket or Azure DevOps, start with Kody AI, which supports all three, then Greptile (GitLab and Bitbucket) or CodeRabbit (all three).
- Is there a free AI code review tool?
- Yes, with limits. cubic’s Starter plan reviews 20 PRs a month per GitHub organization, Greptile’s Starter covers one developer, Kody AI’s Community edition is free on your own model key, and CodeRabbit’s Free plan summarizes PRs. For open source, cubic, CodeRabbit and Devin Review are free on public repositories, and Greptile, Qodo, Gitar and Macroscope take applications.
- Which AI code review tools support GitLab, Bitbucket or Azure DevOps?
- Kody AI, CodeRabbit, Qodo, Gitar and CodeAnt AI support all three. Greptile covers GitLab and Bitbucket, Devin covers GitLab, Bitbucket Data Center and Azure DevOps, and Cursor Bugbot covers all three with Bitbucket Cloud and Azure DevOps in beta. Kilo Code and Codex (in beta) add GitLab, and GitHub Copilot reviews Azure DevOps in preview. cubic, Claude, Macroscope and Gemini Code Assist are GitHub only.
- Do AI code review tools train on your code?
- Some do by default. GitHub may train on Copilot Free, Pro, Pro+ and Max interactions since April 24, 2026, and Devin, Greptile (on de-identified data) and ChatGPT Plus and Pro may too, unless you opt out. Qodo, Kody AI, CodeAnt AI, Gitar and Macroscope say they don’t, and cubic’s model providers are contractually barred from it. Check the vendor’s security page before you install.
- Can ChatGPT review code?
- Yes. On ChatGPT Plus and higher plans, Codex reviews GitHub pull requests automatically or when you comment
@codex review, and it ranks #13 of 15 on Martian’s board. Pasting a file into a chat works for a quick look, but the model sees only what you paste. - Will AI code review replace human reviewers?
- No, and the vendors don’t claim it will. Copilot’s reviews don’t count toward required approvals by default, Claude’s managed review never approves or blocks a PR, and OpenAI pitches Codex as an additional reviewer. Let the AI take the first pass on bugs, and keep people on design and intent.
- How accurate is AI code review?
- It varies a lot. On Martian’s last-month view, F1 runs from 48.7 for the lowest-ranked tool to 64.0 for the highest, so every tool misses some real issues and leaves some comments nobody acts on. Use the score to shortlist, then judge by your own PRs.
A benchmark tells you which two tools to try first; a week of your own pull requests tells you which one to keep.
If you’re on GitHub, try cubic on your next pull request. The trial lasts 7 days and needs no card.