GILD verdict
Pick Kimi Code when you want Moonshot's K3.1 Pro across a CLI, IDE, and desktop on one plan and your sessions fit its 5-hour window.
Qwen Code is the better choice when the agent must stay independent of one model, run local models, or follow strict approval modes. For a team of 10 on monthly billing, Kimi Pro costs $390 a month (GILD calculation: 10 times $39; Kimi's plan page shows $ without naming a currency) and the Coding Plan Pro US$500.
Kimi Code sells Moonshot's models and its agent together in one plan, and Qwen Code is an open-source agent you point at a model. Kimi Code runs Kimi K3.1 Pro across a CLI, VS Code, a desktop app, and ACP editors on one quota. Qwen Code runs Qwen, Kimi, GLM, MiniMax, or any OpenAI-, Anthropic-, or Gemini-compatible model; Alibaba's Coding Plan is one US$50-a-month route, and the free Qwen OAuth tier ended on April 15, 2026.
Choosing between Kimi Code and Qwen Code
Choose Kimi Code if
- You want Kimi K3.1 Pro with a 1M-token context window and one plan covering the CLI, VS Code, the desktop, and ACP editors.
- A plan from $19 a month (Kimi's plan page shows $ without naming a currency) per developer fits your sessions.
- You want Kimi models inside Claude Code or OpenCode through the plan's API key.
Choose Qwen Code if
- You want an open-source agent that switches among Qwen, other hosted models, or local Ollama and vLLM models at runtime.
- Your team works on Alibaba Cloud and can live within the Coding Plan's request quota.
- You want five documented approval modes, from read-only Plan to full YOLO automation.
Side by side
| Dimension | Kimi Code | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| What you payList prices in US dollars on October 28, 2026. | Included in Kimi plans from Plus: Plus $19 a month (Kimi's plan page shows $ without naming a currency) or $15 billed annually, Pro $39 or $31, Max $99 or $79, Ultra $199 or $159; Extra Usage past the quota is charged by actual usage12 | The agent is free and open source; models come from the Alibaba Cloud Coding Plan Pro at US$50 a month, a QwenCloud or Model Studio API key, another vendor's key, or a local model. The free Qwen OAuth tier was discontinued on April 15, 20261214 |
| Monthly cost for a team of 10 developers (GILD calculation)GILD calculation from Kimi's plan page and Alibaba Cloud's Coding Plan page on October 28, 2026. Inputs: 10 developers and one plan each; monthly billing gives $390 for Kimi Pro and US$500 for Coding Plan Pro, while annual billing gives $310 for Kimi Pro; no Extra Usage or pay-as-you-go overage. | For a team of 10 developers on Kimi Pro billed monthly: 10 times $39, or $390 a month; $310 a month on annual billing at $311 | For a team of 10 developers on the Coding Plan Pro: 10 times US$50, or US$500 a month, since each plan is for one person's use and must not be shared; the Qwen Code CLI itself costs nothing14 |
| Quota | A rolling 5-hour window and a monthly total shared with Kimi chat, with no weekly limit on new plans; every device and API key shares one quota2 | On the Coding Plan Pro: up to 6,000 requests per 5 hours, 45,000 per week, and 90,000 per month; simple tasks typically use 5 to 10 model calls and complex tasks use 10 to 30 or more, with actual consumption varying14 |
| Models | Managed Kimi models are K3.1 Pro, K3.1 Pro Highspeed, K3 with 1M or 256K context, K2.8 Preview, and K2.7 Code Highspeed; the CLI also supports configured third-party providers3 | Any model: the Coding Plan lists qwen3.7-plus, qwen3.6-plus, kimi-k2.5, glm-5, and MiniMax-M2.5; API keys and local Ollama or vLLM models reach others1114 |
| Where it runs and where data goes | The CLI runs locally and stores config, sessions, and credentials under ~/.kimi-code; model calls go to Moonshot's China or overseas endpoint45 | The CLI runs locally; requests go to the model service you configure, such as Alibaba Cloud Model Studio for the Coding Plan, QwenCloud, another vendor, or a local Ollama or vLLM model1112 |
| Editors and integrations | CLI, VS Code extension, desktop app, and Zed and JetBrains over ACP; MCP servers, skills, plugins, and hooks67 | CLI, desktop, browser, and VS Code, Zed, and JetBrains plugins; an experimental ACP daemon; MCP, subagents, and skills11 |
| Approvals | Read-only tools run without confirmation; file changes and shell commands ask first unless a permission rule allows them8 | Five modes: Plan (read-only), Ask Permissions, Auto-Edit, Auto (classifier-evaluated), and YOLO (full automation)13 |
| Openness | MIT-licensed CLI on GitHub, tied to Kimi's managed service by default, with other model platforms configurable910 | Open-source CLI on GitHub, originally based on Google's Gemini CLI v0.8.2 and developed independently since v0.111 |
| Choose it if | Choose Kimi Code if you want Kimi K3.1 Pro across CLI, IDE, and desktop on one plan and your sessions fit the 5-hour window12 | Choose Qwen Code if you want an open-source agent that runs on any model, including local ones, with explicit approval modes1113 |
What practitioners report, side by side
Each product's figures come from its own practitioners, for the group you pick.
Overall signal
All practitioners rate Kimi Code −36, 14 points above Qwen Code at −50. Most of the gap is in complaints, with 29 of Qwen Code's 42 sources negative against 24 of Kimi Code's 42.
The score counts the authors from all practitioners that take a side, one vote each with their latest view, and is how far positive votes lead negative ones, per 100 votes, so Kimi Code's −36 rests on votes split 8 positive, 9 mixed and 22 negative.
Each of Qwen Code'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. Use a task pilot to measure accepted work and review time.
Footprint on the Agentic Software Development stack
They differ on one of 12 layers. On Code review, Kimi Code touches it and Qwen Code supports 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 | Kimi Code | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| Validate | ||
| Code review | Touches | Supports |
The 11 layers where they match
| Layer | Kimi Code | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| Plan | ||
| Work planning | Supports | Supports |
| Build | ||
| Codebase context | Supports | Supports |
| Coding | Core | Core |
| Agent runtime | Core | Core |
| Tool execution | Core | Core |
| Validate | ||
| Debugging | Supports | Supports |
| Testing | Supports | Supports |
| Application security | Touches | Touches |
| Ship | ||
| Source control | Touches | Touches |
| CI/CD | Touches | Touches |
| Operate | ||
| Observability | Touches | Touches |
What practitioners praise
Among all practitioners, MCP & Editor Integrations and Harness for Local Models reach 5 sources from 3 authors only for Qwen Code, at 5 of 6 and 5 of 9. Kimi Code needs a pilot on the same repository tasks before you choose on either. Skills, MCP & Plugins reaches 5 sources from 3 authors only for Kimi Code, at 6 of 6. Qwen Code needs a pilot on the same repository tasks before you choose on it.
| Praised for | Kimi Code | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| Skills, MCP & Plugins | 6 of 6 | Not a theme in its sources |
| MCP & Editor Integrations | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 6 |
| Harness for Local Models | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 9 |
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 all practitioners. "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 all practitioners, CLI Bugs and Quota and Usage Limits reach 5 sources from 3 authors only for Kimi Code, at 13 of 15 and 8 of 14. Qwen Code needs a pilot on the same repository tasks before you choose on either. Bugs & Stalled Tasks and Context & Cache Use reach 5 sources from 3 authors only for Qwen Code, at 16 of 16 and 5 of 6. Kimi Code needs a pilot on the same repository tasks before you choose on either.
| Raised as a concern | Kimi Code | Qwen Code |
|---|---|---|
| CLI Bugs | 13 of 15 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Quota and Usage Limits | 8 of 14 | Not a theme in its sources |
| Bugs & Stalled Tasks | Not a theme in its sources | 16 of 16 |
| Context & Cache Use | Not a theme in its sources | 5 of 6 |
14 sources
- Kimi Code plans and pricing
- Kimi Code docs: Membership Benefits (quota and Extra Usage)
- Kimi Code docs: Model Configuration
- Kimi Code docs: FAQ (endpoints and billing by platform)
- Kimi Code CLI docs: Data locations
- Kimi Code CLI docs: Using Kimi Code CLI in IDEs
- Kimi Code CLI docs: Model Context Protocol
- Kimi Code CLI docs: Getting started
- Kimi Code CLI docs: Providers and models
- MoonshotAI/kimi-code on GitHub (MIT license)
- QwenLM/qwen-code on GitHub
- Qwen Code docs: Authentication
- Qwen Code docs: Approval Mode
- Alibaba Cloud Model Studio: Coding Plan overview