Kilo Code vs Roo Code: AI Coding Tool Comparison
Kilo Code and Roo Code are open-source VS Code coding agents with specialised modes.
- Verified 13 Nov 2026Sources are dated on this page
- 7 sourcesLinked, typed and dated
- No winner declaredFit depends on your criteria
- Not tested by Stack18Editorial summary of documented facts
Kilo Code vs Roo Code: the short answer
Kilo Code and Roo Code are open-source VS Code coding agents with specialised modes. Kilo Code extends to JetBrains, a CLI, Slack and a model gateway, while Roo Code centres on custom modes in VS Code with optional cloud agents.
Both use your own keys or paid inference; compare them on mode customisation and where you want agents to run. We compare what documentation supports and mark everything else Unknown. We declare no overall winner, because the better choice depends on workflow, model preferences, oversight needs and budget.
Choose Kilo Code if you- Developers who want an open-source agent with any model
- Teams that want low per-seat management costs
- Users who switch between IDE and terminal
Choose Roo Code if you- VS Code users who want an open-source agent
- Developers who want custom modes
- Teams comparing Cline-style agents
Kilo Code and Roo Code at a glance.
One card per product, drawn from each full profile. Open a profile for features, pricing plans, limits and sources.
Kilo Code
Kilo Code, Inc. · AI Coding Agents
Kilo Code is an open-source AI coding agent that runs in VS Code, JetBrains IDEs and the terminal, with cloud agents, a Slack integration and code reviews. It works with 500+ hosted, bring-your-own-key or local models, and its Kilo Gateway charges provider rates without markup.
Agentic tool- Pricing
- Free and open source; Teams $15 per user; Kilo Pass $19 to $199 per month.
- Best for
- Developers who want an open-source agent with any model
Roo Code
Roo Code, Inc. · AI Coding Agents
Roo Code is an open-source AI coding agent for VS Code. It can read and write files, run terminal commands with approval, use MCP tools and switch between specialised modes, and it works with the model provider of your choice. Roo Code Cloud adds optional cloud agents.
Agentic tool- Pricing
- Free and open source; pay your model provider; cloud agents priced separately.
- Best for
- VS Code users who want an open-source agent
Kilo Code vs Roo Code: feature-by-feature comparison.
Every row is drawn from the sources listed below. Rows that differ are marked, and you can filter the table to show only those.
- YesDocumented
- PartialAvailable with limits or on some plans
- NoDocumented as unavailable
- UnknownNot documented in the sources reviewed
| Dimension |  Kilo Code |  Roo Code |
|---|---|---|
| Product | ||
| Primary interface | YesVS Code, JetBrains, CLI, cloud and Slack. | YesVS Code extension. |
| Model choice | Yes500+ models, BYOK or local. | YesMany providers with your own keys, plus local models. |
| Open-source status | YesMIT clients; Gateway and Cloud source-available. | YesOpen source. |
| Pricing | ||
| Free tier | YesYes (open source). | YesFree extension; you pay model usage. |
| Pricing model | YesFree software; provider-rate usage; Teams seats. | YesFree software; pay model usage; paid cloud agents. |
| Published plan prices reviewedDiffers | YesFree; Teams $15; Kilo Pass $19, $49, $199. | PartialCloud prices not recorded; structure only. |
| Agents | ||
| Cloud or remote agents | YesCloud agents billed per second. | YesRoo Code Cloud Agents via GitHub PRs, Slack or browser. |
| Extensibility | ||
| MCP, skills and hooksDiffers | PartialMCP reported; modes and orchestrator documented. | YesMCP support. |
| Control | ||
| Documented approval and oversight controlsDiffers | UnknownNot documented in the sources reviewed. | PartialApproval for commands and reviewable actions, per third-party reviews. |
| Administration | ||
| Organisation and admin controls | PartialTeams management; Enterprise governance. | PartialRoo Code Cloud Team plan described in the docs index. |
Kilo Code vs Roo Code pricing.
Kilo Code pricing
Free open-source clients; model usage at provider rates or BYOK; optional Kilo Pass credit subscriptions; per-user Teams; per-second cloud compute.
- Free and open sourceFree
- Teams$15 per user per month
- Kilo Pass Starter$19 per month
- Kilo Pass Pro$49 per month
- Kilo Pass Expert$199 per month
Prices from a vendor-published source. Checked 13 Nov 2026.
All Kilo Code plans and sources
Roo Code pricing
Free open-source extension; model costs go to your provider or to Roo Code Cloud; cloud agents are a separate paid product.
- Open source extensionFree
- Roo Code CloudPrice not recorded
- Roomote cloud agentReported by one catalogue
Structure only; figures not recorded. Checked on the profile.
All Roo Code plans and sourcesKilo Code: Free and open source; Teams $15 per user; Kilo Pass $19 to $199 per month.
Roo Code: Free and open source; pay your model provider; cloud agents priced separately. Prices and allowances change often, so confirm on each vendor's live page.
Prices and plans change. Confirm current terms with each vendor before you decide.
Kilo Code vs Roo Code: implementation, ecosystem, AI and security.
Ease of implementation and usability
We did not test setup or onboarding effort. Evaluate both tools on a real branch of your own repository, with your own tests and conventions.
Integrations and ecosystem
Kilo Code: VS Code and Open VSX editors, JetBrains IDEs, CLI (@kilocode/cli), Slack, Cloud agents, Code reviews. Roo Code: VS Code and compatible editors, MCP servers, Anthropic, OpenAI, OpenRouter and Google models, Local models, GitHub and Slack (Cloud Agents).
AI capabilities
Model choice: Kilo Code - 500+ models, BYOK or local. Roo Code - Many providers with your own keys, plus local models.
Security, deployment and administration
Approval and admin controls: Kilo Code - Teams management; Enterprise governance. Roo Code - Roo Code Cloud Team plan described in the docs index. Check each vendor's security documentation for certifications and data-retention terms.
Kilo Code and Roo Code: each option, in balance.
Kilo Code
Strengths and limitations from the profile
- MIT-licensed VS Code, JetBrains and CLI clients.
- 500+ models at provider rates with no markup.
- Teams costs $15 a user, below most per-seat agents.
- Model usage is billed separately unless you bring your own keys.
- Gateway and Cloud backend are source-available, not MIT.
- Many modes and options can mean more setup.
Roo Code
Strengths and limitations from the profile
- Free and open source with bring-your-own-key model access.
- Custom modes, rules and orchestration allow deep customisation.
- Supports MCP and local models.
- Runs mainly inside VS Code with no standalone CLI or web version, per a third-party catalogue.
- Model costs are separate and can grow with agent use.
- Can require more tuning than simpler agents.
Kilo Code or Roo Code: which fits which situation?
No overall winner is declared. The better choice depends on the criteria that matter most to you, so test both against your own requirements.
Choose Kilo Code if you…
- Developers who want an open-source agent with any model
- Teams that want low per-seat management costs
- Users who switch between IDE and terminal
Choose Roo Code if you…
- VS Code users who want an open-source agent
- Developers who want custom modes
- Teams comparing Cline-style agents
Switching between Kilo Code and Roo Code.
Moving between Kilo Code and Roo Code means re-creating project instructions and rules, re-adding MCP servers or other tool connections, and adjusting how your team reviews agent output. Trying each on a separate branch before committing is a low-risk way to compare them.
- Export a sample of your data and test an import into the other product.
- List the automations, integrations and permissions you would need to rebuild.
- Pilot with one team before a full cut-over.
- Check contract terms and notice periods with both vendors.
General guidance, not specific to either vendor. Confirm migration options with the vendors.
Kilo Code vs Roo Code: questions and answers
Is Kilo Code or Roo Code better?
The sources reviewed do not support a single ranking. Kilo Code extends to JetBrains, a CLI, Slack and a model gateway, while Roo Code centres on custom modes in VS Code with optional cloud agents. Test both on your own repository or project before choosing.
Does Kilo Code have a free plan?
Yes. The extensions are free and open source; you pay only for model usage or bring your own keys.
Does Roo Code have a free plan?
Free extension; you pay model usage.
Which is cheaper, Kilo Code or Roo Code?
Kilo Code: Free and open source; Teams $15 per user; Kilo Pass $19 to $199 per month. Roo Code: Free and open source; pay your model provider; cloud agents priced separately. The cheaper option depends on seats, usage and which plan features you need.
Which supports more models, Kilo Code or Roo Code?
Kilo Code: 500+ models, BYOK or local. Roo Code: Many providers with your own keys, plus local models.
Where this comparison comes from.
- Kilo pricing Kilo (kilo.ai) Official Accessed 13 Nov 2026
- Best AI coding assistant (licence scope) Kilo (kilo.ai) Official Accessed 13 Nov 2026
- Best AI coding tools for enterprise Kilo (kilo.ai) Official Accessed 13 Nov 2026
- Kilo Code plans Developers Digest Third-party Accessed 13 Nov 2026
- Roo Code Documentation (repository index) Algolia DocSearch (roocodeinc/roo-code-docs) Third-party Accessed 13 Nov 2026 An index of Roo Code's official documentation repository.
- Roo Code AI IDE List Third-party Accessed 13 Nov 2026 Used for features, workflow and pricing structure.
- Roo Code LLM Reference Third-party Accessed 13 Nov 2026 Used for the Cline relationship and platform.
Comparison rows summarise the sources listed and the two profiles. Confirm current details with each vendor. Stack18 has not tested either product.
Ready to test Kilo Code and Roo Code?
Check each vendor's current pricing and terms, run both against a real scenario from your business, or talk to Stack18 if off-the-shelf software is not the answer.
Logos provided by Logo.dev. Product names and logos are trademarks of their respective owners and appear for identification only; they do not imply endorsement.