GILD verdict
Choose CodeRabbit for Azure DevOps or IDE review, and Greptile for fewer noisy comments and review depth set per pull request.
Greptile bills that depth in credits. CodeRabbit also fits when per-developer hourly limits match how your team opens pull requests. Run both on the same busy repository and count the comments that led to a change. Greptile Pro has no seat fee and bills prepaid credits at US$1 each, while CodeRabbit Essentials costs US$24 per developer billed annually and Team US$48.
Greptile is the quieter reviewer on independent tests. Greptile's capture of Martian's benchmark shows developers acted on 76.2% of its suggestions on July 30, 2026, against 64.9% of CodeRabbit's. Each flagged about half of the fixes developers later made. Both read beyond the diff, learn from reviewer feedback, and offer a CLI for local review. Beyond accuracy, they differ most on how you pay and what each keeps from your code.
Choosing between CodeRabbit and Greptile
Choose CodeRabbit if
Choose Greptile if
- You want to choose review depth per pull request, from a Base review at 1 credit to an Apex review at 10.
- You run Gitea, or Perforce with P4 Code Review on premises.
- You want to self-host with Docker Compose for up to 100 developers, or Kubernetes beyond that, using your own model provider.
Side by side
| Dimension | CodeRabbit | Greptile |
|---|---|---|
| Independent accuracyMartian, which sells no reviewer, scores tools on fresh public pull requests. The July figures are Greptile's capture of the board; The New Stack reported the October ranks. | Martian online benchmark: 64.9% of suggestions acted on and 51.6% of later fixes flagged (Jul 30, 2026); third on Oct 6, 20262021 | Martian online benchmark: 76.2% of suggestions acted on and 50.6% of later fixes flagged (Jul 30, 2026); second on Oct 6, 20262021 |
| Team priceList prices in US dollars. CodeRabbit month-to-month prices are US$30, US$60, and US$90. Greptile offers custom pricing for annual contracts. | Essentials US$24, Team US$48, or Advanced US$72 per developer per month, billed annually | Pro: no seat fee; prepaid credits at US$1 each, shared across the organization |
| Included reviews | 5 to 12 PR reviews per developer per hour by plan, as a rolling allowance | None on Pro; every review spends credits. A Base review uses 1, Plus 3, and Apex 10 |
| Beyond the plan | US$0.25 per reviewed file, under a monthly spending cap | Credits at US$1 each; new reviews pause at zero unless automatic recharge is on |
| Free tier | PR summaries, plus IDE and CLI reviews | Starter: 1 active developer and 50 credits per month |
| Git platforms | GitHub and GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab cloud and self-managed, Azure DevOps, Bitbucket Cloud and Data Center | GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket Cloud on all plans; GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab Self-Managed, Bitbucket Data Center, and Gitea on Enterprise; Perforce on premises |
| Before the pull request | Extension for VS Code-compatible editors, and a CLI with an agent output mode | CLI for local branches, and an MCP server for Cursor, Claude Code, VS Code, and Codex |
| Self-hosting | Enterprise customers with 500 or more seats | Enterprise, on Docker Compose or Kubernetes |
| Code storage and training | Encrypted code and dependency caches, a code index, and Learnings, with an opt-out; no training on private repositories, while the privacy policy reserves training on open-source repositories | Code cached on an encrypted filesystem until access is revoked; de-identified data used for AI training unless you opt out |
| Audit | SOC 2 Type II, audited annually | SOC 2 Type II |
What practitioners report, side by side
Each product's figures come from its own practitioners, for the group you pick.
Overall signal
Leaders and teams rate Greptile +40, 24 points above CodeRabbit at +16. Most of the gap is in complaints, with 14 of CodeRabbit's 46 sources negative against 3 of Greptile's 20.
The score counts the authors from leaders and teams that take a side, one vote each with their latest view, and is how far positive votes lead negative ones, per 100 votes, so CodeRabbit's +16 rests on votes split 21 positive, 9 mixed and 14 negative. Each of Greptile's authors wrote one source here, so each source is one vote.
A lead of a fifth of the votes reads positive and a lead of half strong positive, with the same lines below zero. The dots show each source, positive, mixed, negative. Run a pilot on live pull requests to measure which comments engineers act on and which they dismiss.
Footprint on the Agentic Software Development stack
They differ on two of 12 layers. On Work planning, CodeRabbit supports it and Greptile touches it. On Coding, CodeRabbit supports it and Greptile touches it. Coverage is each product's placement on this stack, as its product page shows it. Core is a job the product owns; Supports and Touches are jobs it helps with. Coverage says nothing about how well a product does them.
| Layer | CodeRabbit | Greptile |
|---|---|---|
| Plan | ||
| Work planning | Supports | Touches |
| Build | ||
| Coding | Supports | Touches |
The 10 layers where they match
| Layer | CodeRabbit | Greptile |
|---|---|---|
| Build | ||
| Codebase context | Supports | Supports |
| Agent runtime | Touches | Touches |
| Tool execution | Supports | Supports |
| Validate | ||
| Debugging | Touches | Touches |
| Testing | Supports | Supports |
| Code review | Core | Core |
| Application security | Supports | Supports |
| Ship | ||
| Source control | Supports | Supports |
| CI/CD | Touches | Touches |
| Operate | ||
| Observability | Touches | Touches |
What practitioners praise
Among leaders and teams, CodeRabbit alone has three praise themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Real Bug Catches and PR Summaries & Walkthroughs lead, at 12 of 12 and 4 of 5. Bug Detection reaches 5 sources from 3 authors only for Greptile, at 8 of 8. CodeRabbit needs a pilot on the same pull requests before you choose on it.
| Praised for | CodeRabbit | Greptile |
|---|---|---|
| Real Bug Catches | 12 of 12 | Not a theme in its sources |
| PR Summaries & Walkthroughs | 4 of 5 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Configurable Review Rules | 4 of 8 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Bug Detection | Not a theme in its sources | 8 of 8 |
Each count is the sources that praise a theme, or raise it as a concern, out of those that discuss it. A row pairs the two products when both carry a theme under the same or an equivalent name.
A count ending in "so far" has under 5 sources from 3 authors among leaders and teams. "Not a theme in its sources" means GILD found no theme of that name in that product's sources.
What practitioners raise as concerns
Among leaders and teams, CodeRabbit alone has three concern themes that reach 5 sources from 3 authors. Comment Noise and Wrong or Overstated Findings lead, at 18 of 23 and 4 of 6.
| Raised as a concern | CodeRabbit | Greptile |
|---|---|---|
| Comment Noise | 18 of 23 | 2 of 4 so far |
| Wrong or Overstated Findings | 4 of 6 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Rate Limits & Seat Cost | 4 of 8 | Not a theme in its sources |
21 sources
- CodeRabbit pricing
- CodeRabbit docs: Plans and pricing
- CodeRabbit docs: Usage-based reviews
- CodeRabbit docs: Git platforms
- CodeRabbit docs: IDE extension
- CodeRabbit docs: CLI
- CodeRabbit docs: FAQ (data security)
- CodeRabbit docs: Self-hosted CodeRabbit
- CodeRabbit Security
- CodeRabbit Privacy Policy (updated October 16, 2026)
- Greptile pricing
- Greptile docs: Billing
- Greptile docs: Review tiers
- Greptile docs: Code providers
- Greptile docs: CLI
- Greptile docs: MCP IDE setup
- Greptile docs: Deployment options
- Greptile docs: Overview
- Greptile security practices
- Greptile: Greptile Ranks #1 on Martian's AI Code Review Benchmark
- The New Stack: Copilot tops GitHub's own AI code review benchmark. An independent one tells a different story. (Oct 6, 2026)