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

OpenCodevsWarp

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 84). OpenCode wins on citation honesty, source quality, and value for money; the rest is a wash. For the canonical workflow, pick OpenCode. Use Warp when its niche specifically wins above.

OpenCode · avg
77
wins 7 of 16
Warp · avg
73
wins 3 of 16
Fields differ
12
of 16 dossier rows
Receipts
18
sources + bench notes

Checked 2026-06-15 · OpenCode·Checked 2026-06-09 · Warp

Dossier fields

Sixteen fields, side by side.

No.FieldOpenCodeWarp
01Status · Editorial quality gateFlagshipSolid
02Editorial fit · 0–100 score95 / 10084 / 100
03CategoryBuild & codeBuild & code
04Primary surfaceLocal appLocal app
05Modalities
  • Code
  • Text
  • Code
  • Text
06Role in a stackOpen-source terminal coding agent and model-agnostic harnessAI-native terminal and agentic development workspace
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 terminal-native AI help without leaving command-line workflows
  • Teams experimenting with local and cloud coding agents, third-party CLI agents, BYOK/BYO tooling, and shared command workflows
  • Power users who value modern terminal UX plus agent orchestration
  • Organizations that need SOC 2 / ZDR-positioned controls before using AI in terminal workflows
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 require a fully local traditional terminal with no account/cloud features
  • You cannot let command history, code context, outputs, or cloud-agent conversations leave the machine without strict controls
  • Credit-based AI usage and plan-seat changes would make developer costs hard to govern
  • Your team lacks review/rollback practices for commands and code changes suggested by agents
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
  • Modern terminal
  • Terminal/Agent modes
  • Warp Agent
  • Claude Code/Codex/OpenCode/Gemini/Copilot orchestration
  • Oz agent/control plane
  • code editor
  • file tree
  • LSP
  • interactive code review
  • Warp Drive workflows/notebooks/prompts/plans/rules/env vars
  • Active AI + disable controls
  • Network Log
  • team code indexing
  • MCP integrations
  • agent profiles/guardrails
  • SSO/admin/roles/usage visibility
  • BYOLLM/AWS Bedrock
  • self-host cloud agents
  • SOC2 Type II/ZDR
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
  • Agents can run risky commands
  • Terminal/repo/env-var context creates privacy boundaries
  • Credits, reloads, auto-reload, and seat limits can shift costs
  • BYOK/custom endpoints change retention policy
  • Enterprise self-host/BYOLLM/hybrid controls require contract and deployment review
  • Shared sessions/MCP integrations can leak sensitive context
  • Nontraditional UX may repel minimal-terminal users
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.
  • Run 10 tasks: shell diagnosis, repo navigation, failing test fix, dependency issue, deployment command, rollback, refactor, log inspection, secrets-safe config, and unsafe-command refusal.
    Pending.
  • Compare Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode, Gemini CLI, and Warp Agent inside Warp.
    Pending.
  • Toggle Active AI, inspect cloud/session behavior, and verify ZDR/retention controls by plan.
    Pending.
14Alternatives tracked
  • Cursor
  • Claude Code
  • Command Code
  • Factory
  • Warp
  • Ghostty
  • iTerm2
  • Cursor
  • Claude Code
  • GitHub Copilot CLI
  • OpenAI Codex CLI
15Pricing checked2026-06-152026-06-09
16Last verified2026-06-152026-06-09
16 metrics

Sixteen numbers, one shared midline.

OpenCodevsWarp

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 84). OpenCode wins on citation honesty, source quality, and value for money; the rest is a wash. For the canonical workflow, pick OpenCode. Use Warp when its niche specifically wins above.

  1. Editorial fit
    OpenCode95Warp84
  2. Source quality
    OpenCode71Warp66
  3. Citation honesty
    OpenCode70Warp58
  4. Privacy controls
    OpenCode56Warp55
  5. Value for money
    OpenCode93Warp58
  6. Speed
    OpenCode80Warp78
  7. Integration
    OpenCode75Warp82
  8. Onboarding
    OpenCode80Warp78
  9. Reliability
    OpenCode76Warp82
  10. Feature depth
    OpenCode94Warp88
  11. Data portability
    OpenCode73Warp73
  12. Transparency
    OpenCode100Warp100
  13. Ecosystem reach
    OpenCode75Warp82
  14. Documentation
    OpenCode71Warp66
  15. Independence
    OpenCode56Warp55
  16. Affordability
    OpenCode65Warp55
OpenCode · avg 77 · wins 7 of 160avg 73 · wins 3 of 16 · Warp
EvidenceOpenCode 3 · Warp 0
  1. 01Editorial fit
    95
    84
  2. 02Source quality
    71
    66
  3. 03Citation honesty
    70
    58
  4. 04Privacy controls
    56
    55
PrivacyOpenCode 1 · Warp 1
  1. 05Value for money
    93
    58
  2. 06Speed
    80
    78
  3. 07Integration
    75
    82
  4. 08Onboarding
    80
    78
CapabilityOpenCode 1 · Warp 1
  1. 09Reliability
    76
    82
  2. 10Feature depth
    94
    88
  3. 11Data portability
    73
    73
  4. 12Transparency
    100
    100
Cost & fitOpenCode 2 · Warp 1
  1. 13Ecosystem reach
    75
    82
  2. 14Documentation
    71
    66
  3. 15Independence
    56
    55
  4. 16Affordability
    65
    55
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 · Warp
Build & code
Warp
84/100
ROLEAI-native terminal and agentic development workspace
Editorial fit
84
Source quality
66
Citation honesty
58
Privacy controls
55
Value for money
58
Speed
78
CUSTOMFree
CUSTOMPro
CUSTOMEnterprise
SolidVerified 2026-06-09VP·METHOD

AI-native terminal and agentic development workspace — Agentic development environment born from a modern terminal, with Terminal and Agent modes, local/cloud coding agents, third-party CLI agent orchestration, Warp Drive workflows, code review, and enterprise privacy controls.

Privacy facets

Where each card is actually private.

OpenCodeWarp
Training on your dataUnknownUnknown: Not statedPartialPartial: Opt-out available
EU data residencyNoNo: Not documentedPartialPartial: Enterprise tier only
SOC 2 attestationNoNo: Not documentedYesYes: Documented
Local-first by defaultNoNo: Cloud onlyNoNo: Cloud only
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 Warp19

  • Modern terminal
  • Terminal/Agent modes
  • Warp Agent
  • Claude Code/Codex/OpenCode/Gemini/Copilot orchestration
  • Oz agent/control plane
  • code editor
  • file tree
  • LSP
  • interactive code review
  • Warp Drive workflows/notebooks/prompts/plans/rules/env vars
  • Active AI + disable controls
  • Network Log
  • team code indexing
  • MCP integrations
  • agent profiles/guardrails
  • SSO/admin/roles/usage visibility
  • BYOLLM/AWS Bedrock
  • self-host cloud agents
  • SOC2 Type II/ZDR
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

Warp

  • Agents can run risky commands
  • Terminal/repo/env-var context creates privacy boundaries
  • Credits, reloads, auto-reload, and seat limits can shift costs
  • BYOK/custom endpoints change retention policy
  • Enterprise self-host/BYOLLM/hybrid controls require contract and deployment review
  • Shared sessions/MCP integrations can leak sensitive context
  • Nontraditional UX may repel minimal-terminal users
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)

Warp

Build & code
  • CUSTOMFree
  • CUSTOMPro
  • CUSTOMEnterprise

raw · Deepened 2026-06-08 from official Warp pricing/enterprise docs: Free $0 up to 10 seats with free AI credits, limited Agent/cloud-agent access, BYOK/custom endpoint support, any-harness-in-cloud beta, individual data controls, and limited Warp Drive/conversation storage. Build $20/mo or $18/mo annual with 1,500 credits, frontier OpenAI/Anthropic/Google models, reload credits with volume discounts, auto-reload, team spend cap, extended cloud agents, high indexing limits, unlimited Warp Drive/collaboration/storage, and private support. Max $200/$180 with 12× Build credits. Business $50/$45 up to 25 seats with team metrics, admin data controls, SAML SSO. Enterprise custom with unlimited seats, custom pools/usage terms, spend controls, Analytics API, BYOLLM, self-host cloud agents, custom indexing, cross-harness memory preview, onboarding, account manager, and shared Slack.

Verdict

Which card to actually pick.

In the Build & code set, OpenCode edges ahead overall (editorial fit 95 vs 84). OpenCode wins on citation honesty, source quality, and value for money; the rest is a wash. For the canonical workflow, pick OpenCode. Use Warp when its niche specifically wins above.

Open OpenCode's dossierOpen Warp's dossier
Try OpenCode ↗Try Warp ↗