Google Antigravity vs Kiro
A side-by-side comparison of Google Antigravity and Kiro, two IDE tools, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Google Antigravity | Kiro |
|---|---|---|
| Category | IDE | IDE |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Deployment | Local | Local |
| Platforms | macOS, Windows, Linux, CLI | macOS, Windows, Linux, CLI |
| Model support | Multi-model | Multi-model |
| Vendor (differs) | AWS | |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Google Antigravity
Agent-first VS Code fork where agents emit verifiable Artifacts — plans, screenshots, recordings — not just diffs.
- Manager view orchestrates parallel agents
- Agents produce verifiable Artifacts
- Spans editor, terminal, and browser
- Launched with Gemini 3, free in preview
- Public preview — early/unstable
- Closed source
- Ties best into Google's Gemini models
- Smaller ecosystem than Cursor
Kiro
Spec-first: writes requirements/design/tasks .md artifacts to disk before coding, unlike prompt-to-diff editors.
- Durable spec artifacts before implementation
- Built on Code OSS — VS Code extensions transfer
- Agent hooks automate actions on file events
- Runs on Claude Sonnet models
- Young product; agent still maturing
- Spec workflow adds overhead for small tasks
- Free tier capped at limited monthly interactions
When to pick which
Both cover Autonomous coding agent, IDE integration, and Code generation.
Pick Google Antigravity if you need Multi-agent orchestration and Browser automation.
- Multi-agent orchestration (primary capability)
- Browser automation (secondary capability)
Pick Kiro if you need Trigger-action automation and Tool / function calling.
- Trigger-action automation (secondary capability)
- Tool / function calling (secondary capability)
Kiro leans on Code generation as a headline capability; Google Antigravity treats it as secondary.
- Code generation (primary capability)