Harness Hub

The directory · side by side

Compare

Line up two to four entries and see where they differ. The link in your address bar shares this exact comparison.

CodeRabbit vs Greptile. Rows marked Differs have different values.

Startup

CodeRabbit

Remove

Startup

Greptile

Remove

TypeStartupStartup
Categories
In one lineAI code review and change governance for agentic development.AI code review agents with full-codebase context.
Stage & fundingDiffersSeries B · $60M Series B led by Scale Venture Partners at $550M valuation (Sep 2025)Series B · $50M Series B led by Menlo Ventures at $750M valuation (Oct 2026)
GitHub stars——
License——
Language——
Last push——
Works with——
Built on——
Built on it——
Similar toDiffers
People linkedDiffers13
Events00
Pros
  • User reportsWidely adopted; open-source maintainers credit it as a daily reviewer and a project sponsor.[1]
  • Independent testOften benchmarked as lower-noise than rivals, with about 2 false positives against Greptile's 11 in one 50-PR comparison.[1]
  • DocsHas expanded beyond PR review into security deep scans and enforceable merge gates.[1]
  • User reportsIndexes the full codebase for review context and is often rated high-recall; one benchmark put its bug catch rate at 82% against CodeRabbit's 44%.[1]
  • User reportsPractitioners describe its reviews as close to a static-analysis pass without much false-positive noise.[1][2]
  • DocsPro has no seat fees: prepaid credits are shared across unlimited developers and agents, and OSS projects and early startups get free credits.[1]
  • DocsEnterprise supports self-hosting and many git hosts, including GitHub Enterprise Server, GitLab Self-Managed, Bitbucket Data Center, Gitea and Perforce.[1]
Cons
  • Independent testIn 2025 Kudelski Security turned one malicious PR into RCE on CodeRabbit's runners, leaking its GitHub App key and giving write access to about 1M repositories (since patched).[1][2]
  • DocsPer-seat billing covers any developer who opens a PR in an enabled repo (Pro around $24/user/month annually), and some users object to per-user gates.[1][2]
  • User reportsTeams report too much noise, especially on large PRs, and some replaced it with in-house Claude or Codex reviewers.[1][2]
  • User reportsBenchmarks show it catching fewer bugs than higher-recall tools; one put it at 44% against Greptile's 82%.[1]
  • DocsPer-review billing ($1 base, $3 Plus, $10 Apex) makes cost scale with PR volume, and the 2026 pricing switch drew 'predatory' criticism.[1][2]
  • User reportsOpen-source contributors were reportedly billed for usage after the pricing change.[1]
  • Independent testFalse-positive rates are disputed; one 50-PR comparison found 11 against CodeRabbit's 2.[1][2]
  • User reportsSome teams evaluating Greptile and its rivals concluded a webhook-triggered in-house agent would be cheaper.[1]
Best forTeams that want low-friction AI PR review across many repos with a free tier for open source.Teams that value catching more bugs over minimal noise and want per-use billing without seats.
Watch out forGitHub App permissions after the 2025 RCE, and per-seat costs as AI-generated PR volume grows.Per-review costs at high PR volume, especially with agent-generated PRs.
Links

Popular comparisons