Continue vs Sourcegraph Cody

Option A

Continue

Open VS Code / JetBrains plugin: autocomplete and chat against models you configure.

Best for

• Teams that want model choice inside VS Code or JetBrains
• Local plus API mixes
• People willing to own config

Strengths

• No forced IDE migration
• Control

Trade-offs

• Config tax
• Not a managed agent product

Verdict

Continue is the open plugin path. Cursor is managed agent UX. Copilot is the seat switch. Cody is Sourcegraph context. Tabnine is private completion. Pick Continue when someone will own the config file. Write that name down. If the name is “we’ll figure it out,” buy Copilot and stop pretending you run a platform. Pick Continue when a named person owns the YAML. Pick Copilot when nobody will. Document allowed models. Surprise local weights are how two teammates debug two different worlds.

Option B

Sourcegraph Cody

Code intelligence at monorepo scale — answers that know more than the open tab.

Best for

• Monorepos and shared libraries
• Teams already on Sourcegraph
• Blast-radius questions

Strengths

• Knows more than the tab
• Honest job when the graph is huge

Trade-offs

• Weight
• Needs the platform

Verdict

Cody is monorepo intelligence. Cursor is the local agent IDE. Copilot is the GitHub seat. Continue is the open plugin. Trial the deprecated-API question on your real graph. If it fails, you are not ready. If it works, you found a reason to pay. Confirm Sourcegraph licensing before you promise the team Cody. Trial Cody on your real blast radius. Confirm Sourcegraph licensing. Cursor if you wanted a local agent IDE. Skip Cody if you do not have a monorepo problem. If the graph misses callers you know, stop the tour and fix the integration.