Make.com Agents vs Sourcegraph Cody: 2026 comparison
Visual workflow automation with AI agents — drag-and-drop scenarios across 2,000+ apps.
Code intelligence agent for enterprise — answers questions about your code, navigates large monorepos.
Make.com Agents vs Sourcegraph Cody — specs
| Spec | Make.com Agents | Sourcegraph Cody |
|---|---|---|
| Agent Rank | 83 / 100 (A) | 75 / 100 (A) |
| Autonomy | Semi-autonomous | Semi-autonomous |
| Pricing | Freemium · from $9 | Freemium · from $9 |
| Open source | No | No |
| Capabilities | Tool use, Memory, Multi-agent | Code, Tool use, RAG, Memory |
| Integrations | 8 apps | 4 apps |
| Verified | Verified | Verified |
| Released | Feb 2025 | Feb 2025 |
Agent Rank breakdown
- Autonomy fit
- 8
- Capabilities
- 6
- Integrations
- 10
- Pricing value
- 8
- Polish & maturity
- 8
- Verifiability
- 10
Auto-computed from autonomy, capabilities, integrations, pricing, maturity and editorial verification. Updated every deploy. How is this computed?
- 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
- +Visual scenario builder is the most accessible automation tool besides Zapier
- +Cheapest AI-agent automation tier on the market ($9)
- +Strong on multi-step branching scenarios where Zapier feels limiting
- −Operations math is opaque at first — every step costs ops
- −Smaller AI feature set than Lindy / Relay built-from-scratch agent platforms
- −European data residency only on paid tiers
- +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
- −Editor experience less polished than Cursor
- −Agent autonomy still trails Cursor and Claude Code
- −Best fit for established orgs with existing Sourcegraph deployments
Pricing
- +1,000 operations/mo
- +No agent features
- +2 active scenarios
- +10,000 ops/mo
- +AI agent nodes
- +Webhooks + schedules
- +10,000 ops base + add-ons
- +Priority queue
- +Custom variables
- +Shared scenarios
- +Roles + admin
- +Higher ops base
- +Limited chat + completions
- +Public repos only
- +Unlimited usage
- +Larger context
- +Private repos
- +Code search across monorepos
- +Self-hosted option
- +SSO + audit
Which one should you pick?
Pick Make.com Agents if your stack spans many tools and integration depth is the constraint.
Try Make.com Agents →Pick Sourcegraph Cody if its specific capabilities (Code, Tool use) match what you need.
Try Sourcegraph Cody →Affiliate links. We may earn a commission at no extra cost to you.
Frequently asked
Should I pick Make.com Agents or Sourcegraph Cody in 2026?+
Pick Make.com Agents if your stack spans many tools and integration depth is the constraint. Pick Sourcegraph Cody if its specific capabilities (Code, Tool use) match what you need. Most working teams running both can use Make.com Agents for primary work and Sourcegraph Cody for the workflows where its specific strengths matter.
What's the price difference between Make.com Agents and Sourcegraph Cody?+
Both Make.com Agents and Sourcegraph Cody start in the same pricing range (Freemium · from $9 vs Freemium · from $9). Total cost of ownership depends on your team size and volume — see the TCO calculator for your specific math.
Which is more autonomous, Make.com Agents or Sourcegraph Cody?+
Both Make.com Agents 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.