Coding · Head-to-head

GLM-5.2 vs Cody

GLM-5.2 vs Cody: pricing, features, and which to pick in 2026.

The verdict

Pick GLM-5.2 if…
  • your primary use case is development teams building coding agents who want a frontier-class model they can self-host, fine-tune, and deploy under a fully permissive license.
  • you need: agents
Try GLM-5.2 →
Pick Cody if…
  • your primary use case is development teams who want an ai coding assistant that reasons over their entire codebase and multiple repositories, not just the open file.
Try Cody →

Side-by-side specs

Spec GLM-5.2 Cody
Category Coding Coding
Pricing model freemium freemium
Headline pricing Free 20M tokens on signup + open weights; paid API & coding plans (check site) Free tier + Pro $9/mo + Enterprise custom
Free tier Free chat access plus 20M free tokens on API signup, and open weights available to download and self-host under MIT. Autocomplete, chat, and commands with usage limits
AI Score 8.7/10 8.6/10
Best for Development teams building coding agents who want a frontier-class model they can self-host, fine-tune, and deploy under a fully permissive license. Development teams who want an AI coding assistant that reasons over their entire codebase and multiple repositories, not just the open file.
Editor's pick ✓ Yes ✓ Yes
Use cases development agents development
Date added 2026-06-27 2026-05-01

Pros and cons

GLM-5.2 logo

GLM-5.2

Coding · freemium

Pros

  • MIT-licensed open weights — full commercial use, self-hosting, and fine-tuning with no revocable API terms
  • 1M-token context handles whole codebases and long agent histories in one pass
  • Benchmark results competitive with top closed frontier models, especially on coding and agentic tasks
  • Genuinely free to start: chat UI, 20M signup tokens, or download the weights
  • Strong fit for coding agents thanks to its long-horizon, tool-use orientation

Cons

  • ×At 744B parameters, self-hosting demands serious GPU hardware — out of reach for most individual developers
  • ×Vendor-published benchmarks need independent verification; real-world coding performance may vary from the claims
  • ×Hosted API and coding-plan pricing isn't transparently listed, so budgeting requires checking the site
  • ×As a model from Zhipu AI, some enterprises face data-residency or procurement constraints around China-based providers
Cody logo

Cody

Coding · freemium

Pros

  • Codebase context understands your full repo, not just the open file
  • Multi-model support lets you pick the right LLM for each task
  • Works as a VS Code and JetBrains extension — no need to switch editors
  • Enterprise tier integrates with Sourcegraph code search across multiple repositories

Cons

  • ×Context engine is most capable on Enterprise tier — free users get limited repo-wide context
  • ×Lacks the autonomous agent and multi-file editing capabilities of Cursor or Windsurf
  • ×Autocomplete quality lags behind GitHub Copilot and Cursor in head-to-head comparisons
  • ×Sourcegraph integration adds complexity to enterprise setup and onboarding
Comparison explorer Add a third tool to this matchup Opens the interactive explorer with GLM-5.2 and Cody already in place. Slot in up to two more tools from the full index, filter by category or price, and read every plan, feature, pro and con in one table.

Related comparisons

Updated 2026-06-27. Spec data sourced from official product pages and tracked in our public directory at /tools.

Weekly issue

The 5 AI tools that mattered this week.

One email, Fridays. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.