VerdictPal
Join
VerdictPal · editorial desk · 2026VerdictPal
Compare · Head-to-head

Pick two cards. See the diff.

Stat bars are editorial heuristics, methodology linked — not a fake benchmark leaderboard. Put two dossiers side by side and see where each one breaks.
CardsModels

Compare · Card A / Card B·Head-to-head

OpenCodevsCommand Code

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 88). OpenCode wins on citation honesty; Command Code wins on privacy controls. Both pass our quality gate. The right pick is the one whose strengths match the job you're trying to do.

OpenCode · avg
77
wins 7 of 16
Command Code · avg
74
wins 3 of 16
Fields differ
9
of 16 dossier rows
Receipts
16
sources + bench notes

Checked 2026-06-15 · OpenCode·Checked 2026-06-15 · Command Code

Dossier fields

Sixteen fields, side by side.

No.FieldOpenCodeCommand Code
01Status · Editorial quality gateFlagshipFlagship
02Editorial fit · 0–100 score95 / 10088 / 100
03CategoryBuild & codeBuild & code
04Primary surfaceLocal appLocal app
05Modalities
  • Code
  • Text
  • Code
  • Text
06Role in a stackOpen-source terminal coding agent and model-agnostic harnessTaste-aware terminal coding agent and open-model harness
07Best for
  • Developers who want an inspectable open-source agent instead of a closed IDE-only copilot
  • Teams that need Copilot, ChatGPT, Anthropic BYOK, Zen, Go, or local models in one harness
  • Students and researchers on a budget using Go or free Zen models with spend caps
  • Privacy-sensitive repos where vendor storage claims matter — read Zen model exceptions first
  • Developers who want a terminal-native agent that learns package manager, test runner, and style preferences from edits
  • Builders experimenting with DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, and other open models without writing a custom harness
  • Solo devs and small teams who want $1/mo entry with real agent tooling (MCP, skills, headless -p)
  • Repos already using .commandcode/ taste files that should stay portable via npx taste push/pull
08Avoid if
  • You need a polished GUI IDE with Tab-as-primary workflow — Cursor may fit better
  • You will run Build mode on production branches without tests, Plan review, or /undo discipline
  • You cannot track Zen auto-reload ($20 when balance hits $5) and monthly workspace caps
  • You need guaranteed EU-only inference on every model without admin model allowlists
  • You need a GUI IDE with Tab completion as the primary surface — use Cursor instead
  • You cannot parse credit deals, processing fees, and per-model burn before approving team spend
  • You will run headless agents on sensitive repos without tests, sandbox review, or deny lists
  • You need guaranteed EU-only inference on every model route without reading gateway policies
09Capabilities tracked
  • curl / npm / brew / Docker install
  • Terminal TUI, desktop app beta, IDE extension
  • Plan mode (read-only) and Build mode (writes)
  • /init project analysis and AGENTS.md generation
  • LSP auto-load for typed context
  • Multi-session parallel agents
  • /share session links, /undo, /redo
  • GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT account login
  • 75+ providers via Models.dev and /connect
  • OpenCode Zen pay-as-you-go gateway (BYOK compatible)
  • OpenCode Go subscription for open models ($5 first month)
  • Custom commands, themes, formatters, MCP
  • npm i -g command-code CLI (cmd)
  • taste-1 continuous learning into .commandcode/ skills and /memory
  • Interactive, headless (-p), and sandbox agent modes
  • /skills, /commands, /mcp, hooks, plugins
  • /agents and persistent session memory
  • Built-in file ops, shell, grep, extended thinking
  • Model picker: Claude, GPT, DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, GLM, MiniMax, BYOK
  • Studio billing, usage analytics, team pooled credits
  • npx taste push/pull and /share sessions
  • Commits and PR flows from the terminal
10Failure modes · Documented, not buried
  • Build mode can apply diffs that pass typecheck but fail course rubrics or security review
  • Zen free/promo models may retain data for training — Big Pickle, DeepSeek Flash Free, Nemotron Free, etc.
  • Auto-reload and monthly caps interact confusingly when balance drops below $5
  • Multi-session parallelism can stomp the same files without branch discipline
  • Desktop app is still beta — terminal remains the most documented surface
  • Model deprecation table moves fast — pinned configs break on schedule
  • Prompts and code context still leave the machine to third-party model providers when you invoke AI
  • Credit math (deals + processing fees + top-ups) is easy to mis-budget for teams
  • Taste can encode bad habits if you accept sloppy diffs — garbage in, skill out
  • Headless --yolo mode can execute destructive shell without IDE-style apply review
  • Open-model routes depend on gateways (Vercel, Cloudflare, OpenRouter) with shifting downstream hosts
  • Younger product vs Cursor/Factory — fewer institutional procurement templates
11Evidence levelEditorial · hands-onEditorial · hands-on
12Sources verified · Receipts on the dossier
13Benchmark entries
  • Run /init + Plan mode on a TypeScript monorepo, then Build the smallest feature with Go-plan DeepSeek V4 Flash.
    Desk hands-on: Plan output matched repo conventions after AGENTS.md; Build diffs were reviewable with /undo available.
  • Compare OpenCode Zen Sonnet route vs raw Anthropic BYOK on the same ten refactor prompts.
    Pending formal bench; Zen marketing claims benchmarked provider pairing.
  • Run two parallel sessions on one branch — measure file collision rate.
    Pending.
  • Ship a small CLI feature with Command Code on DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Cursor Agent on the same repo fixture.
    Desk hands-on on VerdictPal: taste file accrued workflow preferences; open-model output matched premium agents on boilerplate tasks.
  • Run 10 headless -p tasks with and without accumulated .commandcode/taste skills.
    Pending formal bench; anecdotal reduction in package-manager and test-runner mismatches after one week.
  • Compare Go-plan credit burn across DeepSeek deal vs Claude Opus on identical refactor prompts.
    Pending; pricing page claims up to 4× stretch on DeepSeek V4 Pro.
14Alternatives tracked
  • Cursor
  • Claude Code
  • Command Code
  • Factory
  • Warp
  • Cursor
  • Factory
  • Warp
  • Claude Code
  • opencode
15Pricing checked2026-06-152026-06-15
16Last verified2026-06-152026-06-15
16 metrics

Sixteen numbers, one shared midline.

OpenCodevsCommand Code

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 88). OpenCode wins on citation honesty; Command Code wins on privacy controls. Both pass our quality gate. The right pick is the one whose strengths match the job you're trying to do.

  1. Editorial fit
    OpenCode95Command Code88
  2. Source quality
    OpenCode71Command Code71
  3. Citation honesty
    OpenCode70Command Code58
  4. Privacy controls
    OpenCode56Command Code78
  5. Value for money
    OpenCode93Command Code91
  6. Speed
    OpenCode80Command Code78
  7. Integration
    OpenCode75Command Code65
  8. Onboarding
    OpenCode80Command Code78
  9. Reliability
    OpenCode76Command Code84
  10. Feature depth
    OpenCode94Command Code86
  11. Data portability
    OpenCode73Command Code57
  12. Transparency
    OpenCode100Command Code100
  13. Ecosystem reach
    OpenCode75Command Code65
  14. Documentation
    OpenCode71Command Code71
  15. Independence
    OpenCode56Command Code78
  16. Affordability
    OpenCode65Command Code33
OpenCode · avg 77 · wins 7 of 160avg 74 · wins 3 of 16 · Command Code
EvidenceOpenCode 2 · Command Code 1
  1. 01Editorial fit
    95
    88
  2. 02Source quality
    71
    71
  3. 03Citation honesty
    70
    58
  4. 04Privacy controls
    56
    78
PrivacyOpenCode 1 · Command Code 0
  1. 05Value for money
    93
    91
  2. 06Speed
    80
    78
  3. 07Integration
    75
    65
  4. 08Onboarding
    80
    78
CapabilityOpenCode 2 · Command Code 1
  1. 09Reliability
    76
    84
  2. 10Feature depth
    94
    86
  3. 11Data portability
    73
    57
  4. 12Transparency
    100
    100
Cost & fitOpenCode 2 · Command Code 1
  1. 13Ecosystem reach
    75
    65
  2. 14Documentation
    71
    71
  3. 15Independence
    56
    78
  4. 16Affordability
    65
    33
CARD A · OpenCode
Build & code
OpenCode
95/100
ROLEOpen-source terminal coding agent and model-agnostic harness
Editorial fit
95
Source quality
71
Citation honesty
70
Privacy controls
56
Value for money
93
Speed
80
FREEOpen source
$10/MOGo
CUSTOMZen
FlagshipVerified 2026-06-15VP·METHOD

Open-source terminal coding agent and model-agnostic harness — Open-source AI coding agent for terminal, desktop, and IDE — 75+ model providers, Plan/Build modes, LSP support, optional OpenCode Go ($10/mo) and Zen pay-as-you-go gateway.

CARD B · Command Code
Build & code
Command Code
88/100
ROLETaste-aware terminal coding agent and open-model harness
Editorial fit
88
Source quality
71
Citation honesty
58
Privacy controls
78
Value for money
91
Speed
78
$1/MOGo
$15/MOPro
$100/MOMax
FlagshipVerified 2026-06-15VP·METHOD

Taste-aware terminal coding agent and open-model harness — Terminal coding agent with continuous taste learning (taste-1), open-model deals, MCP/skills, and subscription credits from $1/mo — ships, tests, and refactors in your conventions.

Privacy facets

Where each card is actually private.

OpenCodeCommand Code
Training on your dataUnknownUnknown: Not statedYesYes: Off by default
EU data residencyNoNo: Not documentedPartialPartial: Enterprise tier only
SOC 2 attestationNoNo: Not documentedNoNo: Not documented
Local-first by defaultNoNo: Cloud onlyPartialPartial: Local option available
Capability split

What each card does uniquely.

Only OpenCode12

  • curl / npm / brew / Docker install
  • Terminal TUI, desktop app beta, IDE extension
  • Plan mode (read-only) and Build mode (writes)
  • /init project analysis and AGENTS.md generation
  • LSP auto-load for typed context
  • Multi-session parallel agents
  • /share session links, /undo, /redo
  • GitHub Copilot and ChatGPT account login
  • 75+ providers via Models.dev and /connect
  • OpenCode Zen pay-as-you-go gateway (BYOK compatible)
  • OpenCode Go subscription for open models ($5 first month)
  • Custom commands, themes, formatters, MCP

Shared0

No overlap detected.

Only Command Code10

  • npm i -g command-code CLI (cmd)
  • taste-1 continuous learning into .commandcode/ skills and /memory
  • Interactive, headless (-p), and sandbox agent modes
  • /skills, /commands, /mcp, hooks, plugins
  • /agents and persistent session memory
  • Built-in file ops, shell, grep, extended thinking
  • Model picker: Claude, GPT, DeepSeek, Qwen, Kimi, GLM, MiniMax, BYOK
  • Studio billing, usage analytics, team pooled credits
  • npx taste push/pull and /share sessions
  • Commits and PR flows from the terminal
Failure modes

Where each card breaks.

OpenCode

  • Build mode can apply diffs that pass typecheck but fail course rubrics or security review
  • Zen free/promo models may retain data for training — Big Pickle, DeepSeek Flash Free, Nemotron Free, etc.
  • Auto-reload and monthly caps interact confusingly when balance drops below $5
  • Multi-session parallelism can stomp the same files without branch discipline
  • Desktop app is still beta — terminal remains the most documented surface
  • Model deprecation table moves fast — pinned configs break on schedule

Command Code

  • Prompts and code context still leave the machine to third-party model providers when you invoke AI
  • Credit math (deals + processing fees + top-ups) is easy to mis-budget for teams
  • Taste can encode bad habits if you accept sloppy diffs — garbage in, skill out
  • Headless --yolo mode can execute destructive shell without IDE-style apply review
  • Open-model routes depend on gateways (Vercel, Cloudflare, OpenRouter) with shifting downstream hosts
  • Younger product vs Cursor/Factory — fewer institutional procurement templates
Pricing

Pulled straight from each dossier.

OpenCode

Build & code
  • FREEOpen source
  • $10/MOGo
  • CUSTOMZen

raw · OSS agent free · BYOK any provider · OpenCode Go $5 first month then $10/mo (open models, generous limits) · Zen pay-as-you-go credits (from $20 top-up, auto-reload at $5 balance) · team workspaces in beta · card fees passed at cost (4.4% + $0.30)

Command Code

Build & code
  • $1/MOGo
  • $15/MOPro
  • $100/MOMax

raw · Go $1/mo + processing fee ($10 credits, ~$40 effective on DeepSeek V4 Pro deals) · Pro $15/mo ($30 credits) · Max $100/mo · Ultra $200/mo · Provider $15/mo API · Teams $40/mo pooled · Enterprise custom · top-up credits roll over at API cost

Verdict

Which card to actually pick.

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 88). OpenCode wins on citation honesty; Command Code wins on privacy controls. Both pass our quality gate. The right pick is the one whose strengths match the job you're trying to do.

Open OpenCode's dossierOpen Command Code's dossier
Try OpenCode ↗Try Command Code ↗