Continue vs Kilo Code
A side-by-side comparison of Continue and Kilo Code, drawn from Ignaite's continuously-verified listings.
Compared from listings verified as of
At a glance
| Attribute | Continue | Kilo Code |
|---|---|---|
| Category (differs) | IDE | Agent |
| Pricing | FREEMIUM | FREEMIUM |
| License | Open core | Open core |
| Deployment (differs) | Local | — |
| Platforms (differs) | VS Code extension, CLI, macOS, Windows, Linux | VS Code extension, CLI |
| Model support (differs) | Multi-model | BYO key / model |
| Vendor (differs) | Continue Dev | Kilo Code, Inc. |
| Capabilities (differs) |
|
|
The honest brief
Continue
Runs fully local via Ollama with your own keys, so code never leaves your machine — unlike cloud-bound rivals like Cursor or Copilot.
- Apache-2.0 open source
- VS Code, JetBrains, and CLI
- Any model provider, your own keys
- Chat, autocomplete, and agent modes
- More setup than turnkey tools
- Quality depends on chosen model
- Less polished than Cursor
Kilo Code
Routes 500+ models at zero markup on your own keys, so you pay providers directly — unlike agents that mark up or lock you to one model.
- Fully open source (MIT)
- Works in VS Code, JetBrains, and CLI
- Plans, writes, edits, and runs code
- Specialized modes (Code, Architect, Debug)
- Free tier plus paid cloud and team plans
- You manage model costs and keys
- Cloud and team features are paid
- Agent quality depends on chosen model
- Young project (launched 2025)
When to pick which
Kilo Code leans on IDE integration as a headline capability; Continue treats it as secondary.
- IDE integration (primary capability)
They also differ on:
- Platforms
- VS Code extension, CLI, macOS, Windows, Linux · VS Code extension, CLI
- Model support
- Multi-model · BYO key / model
Their capability lists differ in recorded depth — compare the full lists above before deciding.