Decagon vs Magic.dev: 2026 comparison
Conversational support agents that resolve tickets like your best reps.
Decagon vs Magic.dev — specs
| Spec | Decagon | Magic.dev |
|---|---|---|
| Agent Rank | 72 / 100 (A) | 67 / 100 (B) |
| Autonomy | Autonomous | Autonomous |
| Pricing | Subscription · Free tier | Subscription · Free tier |
| Open source | No | No |
| Capabilities | Tool use, Memory, RAG | Code, Tool use, Memory |
| Integrations | 3 apps | 2 apps |
| Verified | Verified | Verified |
| Released | Apr 2025 | May 2025 |
Agent Rank breakdown
- Autonomy fit
- 9
- Capabilities
- 6
- Integrations
- 4
- Pricing value
- 9
- Polish & maturity
- 5
- Verifiability
- 10
Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?
- Autonomy fit
- 9
- Capabilities
- 6
- Integrations
- 2
- Pricing value
- 9
- Polish & maturity
- 4
- Verifiability
- 10
Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?
Pros & cons
- +Chat-first agent with consistently 65–75% tier-1 deflection in production
- +Deep integration with existing helpdesks (Zendesk / Intercom / Salesforce)
- +Mid-market priced — easier conversation than Sierra
- −Voice support exists but is not the strength
- −Sales-led — no self-serve sign-up
- −Per-resolution pricing can sting if tickets spike unexpectedly
- +Unique long-context model — can hold an entire mid-sized repo in one session
- +Strong on cross-cutting refactors that other agents struggle with
- +Funded at frontier-lab levels — engineering muscle behind the product
- −Enterprise pricing — no public per-seat tier
- −Newer entrant — fewer customer references than Devin or Cursor
- −Best for very large codebases; overkill for solo + small-team work
Pricing
- +Per-resolution pricing
- +Zendesk / Intercom integration
- +Onboarding included
- +Custom integrations
- +SSO + audit log
- +Dedicated CSM
- +Long-context model (100M+ tokens)
- +Codebase-wide reasoning
- +Custom deployment
Which one should you pick?
Pick Decagon if its specific capabilities (Tool use, Memory) match what you need.
Try Decagon →Pick Magic.dev if its specific capabilities (Code, Tool use) match what you need.
Try Magic.dev →Affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Frequently asked
Should I pick Decagon or Magic.dev in 2026?+
Pick Decagon if its specific capabilities (Tool use, Memory) match what you need. Pick Magic.dev if its specific capabilities (Code, Tool use) match what you need. Most working teams running both can use Decagon for primary work and Magic.dev for the workflows where its specific strengths matter.
What's the price difference between Decagon and Magic.dev?+
Both Decagon and Magic.dev start in the same pricing range (Subscription · Free tier vs Subscription · Free tier). Total cost of ownership depends on your team size and volume — see the TCO calculator for your specific math.
Which is more autonomous, Decagon or Magic.dev?+
Both Decagon and Magic.dev are Autonomous agents — neither has a meaningful autonomy advantage over the other. The decision should hinge on capabilities and pricing instead.