aiagentrank.io

Clay vs Sourcegraph Cody: 2026 comparison

Composable agents for enrichment, scoring and outbound orchestration.

💼SalesSemi-autonomousSubscription · from $149
Tool useBrowserRAG

Code intelligence agent for enterprise — answers questions about your code, navigates large monorepos.

💻CodeSemi-autonomousFreemium · from $9
CodeTool useRAGMemory

Clay vs Sourcegraph Cody — specs

SpecClaySourcegraph Cody
Agent Rank68 / 100 (B)75 / 100 (A)
AutonomySemi-autonomousSemi-autonomous
PricingSubscription · from $149Freemium · from $9
Open sourceNoNo
CapabilitiesTool use, Browser, RAGCode, Tool use, RAG, Memory
Integrations4 apps4 apps
VerifiedVerifiedVerified
ReleasedMar 2025Feb 2025

Categories: ClaySales · Sourcegraph CodyCode

Agent Rank breakdown

Clay
Agent Rank
68/ 100
BB-tier
Autonomy fit
8
Capabilities
6
Integrations
6
Pricing value
5
Polish & maturity
6
Verifiability
10

Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?

Sourcegraph Cody
Agent Rank
75/ 100
AA-tier
Autonomy fit
8
Capabilities
8
Integrations
4
Pricing value
8
Polish & maturity
7
Verifiability
10

Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?

Pros & cons

Clay
Pros
  • +Composable building blocks beat point tools — enrich + score + route in one
  • +Strongest data-source coverage among GTM agents (50+ providers)
  • +Highly programmable; sales ops loves the flexibility
Cons
  • Steep learning curve — not a one-day onboarding
  • Credit math gets opaque at scale
  • Less effective without a sales ops owner driving it
Sourcegraph Cody
Pros
  • +Best-in-class code intelligence for large monorepos and polyglot codebases
  • +Self-hosted option for compliance-sensitive industries
  • +Cheaper than Cursor at the Pro tier
Cons
  • Editor experience less polished than Cursor
  • Agent autonomy still trails Cursor and Claude Code
  • Best fit for established orgs with existing Sourcegraph deployments

Pricing

Clay
Starter
$149/mo
Sales ops solo
  • +Enrichment templates
  • +5k credits/mo
  • +CRM exports
Recommended
Pro
$349/mo
Sales teams
  • +25k credits/mo
  • +Multi-source enrichment
  • +Webhooks
Enterprise
Custom
GTM teams
  • +Unlimited credits
  • +Dedicated CS
  • +SAML SSO
Sourcegraph Cody
Free
Free
Personal use
  • +Limited chat + completions
  • +Public repos only
Recommended
Pro
$9/mo
Solo devs
  • +Unlimited usage
  • +Larger context
  • +Private repos
Enterprise
$19/seat/mo
Engineering teams
  • +Code search across monorepos
  • +Self-hosted option
  • +SSO + audit

Which one should you pick?

Clay

Pick Clay if its specific capabilities (Tool use, Browser) match what you need.

Try Clay →
Sourcegraph Cody

Pick Sourcegraph Cody if cost is the main constraint.

Try Sourcegraph Cody →

Affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.

Frequently asked

Should I pick Clay or Sourcegraph Cody in 2026?+

Pick Clay if its specific capabilities (Tool use, Browser) match what you need. Pick Sourcegraph Cody if cost is the main constraint. Most working teams running both can use Clay for primary work and Sourcegraph Cody for the workflows where its specific strengths matter.

What's the price difference between Clay and Sourcegraph Cody?+

Clay starts at Subscription · from $149; Sourcegraph Cody starts at Freemium · from $9. Sourcegraph Cody is the cheaper entry option. For team deployments the TCO can differ — use the AI Agent Rank TCO calculator for your specific volume.

Which is more autonomous, Clay or Sourcegraph Cody?+

Both Clay and Sourcegraph Cody are Semi-autonomous agents — neither has a meaningful autonomy advantage over the other. The decision should hinge on capabilities and pricing instead.

Want the real monthly cost at your volume? Run the TCO calculator →
← Build your own comparison