Developer Tools · head to head
Cortex vs Sourcegraph
Cortex
Developer Tools
Internal developer portal that scores service ownership and maturity rather than just cataloguing services
- From
- On request
- Rated
- -
Sourcegraph
Developer Tools
Code search and intelligence platform for large codebases with Cody AI assistant
- From
- $16000/year
- Rated
- -
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Cortex pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.; Sourcegraph enterprise pricing starting at $16k annually creates significant barrier for small teams
- Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Cortex and Sourcegraph actually diverge.
| Attribute | Cortex | Sourcegraph |
|---|---|---|
| Starting price | On request | $16000/year |
| Pricing model | quote | subscription |
| Platforms | Web, API | Cloud, Self-hosted |
Identical on both: free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Developer Tools).
What each one covers
Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.
Only in Cortex
- Service catalogue
- Scorecards
- Initiatives
- Self-service templates
- Query language
- Eng intelligence
- Integrations layer
- On-call and ownership mapping
Only in Sourcegraph
Nothing recorded that Cortex does not also cover.
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Cortex
- A platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a Kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of servicesnot Sourcegraph
- An organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitionsnot Sourcegraph
- Enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident reviewnot Sourcegraph
- Replacing a self-hosted Backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgradednot Sourcegraph
Sourcegraph
- Large-scale code migrations across hundreds of repositoriesnot Cortex
- Enterprise governance and code ownership trackingnot Cortex
- AI-assisted bug hunting and security pattern detectionnot Cortex
- Onboarding engineers into large unfamiliar codebasesnot Cortex
- Regulatory compliance and code audit trailsnot Cortex
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Cortex
- Pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.
- The catalogue is only as accurate as the metadata you supply, so an organisation with inconsistent repository conventions spends its first quarter cleaning data before any scorecard means anything.
- Scorecards create political friction: publishing a per-team grade turns an engineering standard into a performance metric, and teams will game the rules rather than fix the underlying issue.
- It is closed source and hosted, so organisations with strict data residency or air-gap requirements have limited options compared with running Backstage themselves.
- Value scales with organisation size, so a company with fifty engineers and thirty services will find the catalogue tells them nothing they did not already know while still paying an enterprise contract.
Sourcegraph
- Enterprise pricing starting at $16k annually creates significant barrier for small teams
- No free tier or standard plan published; all options require custom sales engagement
- Complex enterprise-only positioning limits adoption compared to GitHub Copilot's pervasiveness
- Requires indexing entire codebase; not suitable for small or ephemeral projects
Pricing, plan by plan
Cortex
On request- Cortex$undefined/year
- Service catalogue and ownership mapping
- Scorecards and initiatives
- Self-service templates
Sourcegraph
$16000/year- Enterprise$16000/year
- Scales with team size
- Credits for AI features per user
- Deep Search
Which should you pick?
Choose Cortex if
- You need service catalogue.
- You work on Web, API.
- You also want scorecards.
Questions people ask
- Is Cortex or Sourcegraph better?
- Neither clearly leads. Cortex starts at On request and Sourcegraph at $16000/year, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Cortex or Sourcegraph?
- Cortex starts at On request and Sourcegraph at $16000/year.
- Does Cortex or Sourcegraph run on more platforms?
- Cortex runs on Web, API. Sourcegraph runs on Cloud, Self-hosted.
- What is Cortex best used for?
- Cortex is most often used for a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services, an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions, enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident review, replacing a self-hosted backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgraded. Of those, a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services and an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions are not what Sourcegraph is typically brought in for.
- What can Cortex do that Sourcegraph cannot?
- Cortex covers Service catalogue, Scorecards, Initiatives, Self-service templates.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Cortex: How is Cortex different from Backstage?
Backstage is an open source framework you build and staff. Cortex is a hosted product with scorecards and initiatives out of the box and no platform team required to keep it running.
Cortex: Is pricing published?
No. Cortex requires a sales conversation and prepares a custom proposal.
Cortex: Can it self-host?
It is offered as a hosted product; on-premise arrangements are handled through sales rather than published.
Cortex: What is the main adoption risk?
Bad or missing service metadata. The catalogue and every scorecard on top of it inherit whatever quality your repositories already have.
Related pages
More on Sourcegraph
Other head to heads
- Cortex vs Backstage
- Cortex vs OpsLevel
- Cortex vs Earthly
- Cortex vs Spacelift
- Cortex vs Atlantis
- Cortex vs Depot
- Cortex vs Nix
- Cortex vs SonarQube
- Cortex vs Keycloak
- Cortex vs Ona (formerly Gitpod)
- Cortex vs Vite
- Cortex vs Bazel
- Cortex vs Namespace
- Cortex vs Nixpacks
- Cortex vs Octopus Deploy
- Cortex vs Okteto
- Cortex vs Visual Studio Code
- Cortex vs ESLint
- Cortex vs pnpm
- Cortex vs Turborepo
- Cortex vs Cody
- Cortex vs Sweep
- Cortex vs GitHub Copilot
- Cortex vs Moonrepo
- Cortex vs Pieces for Developers
- Cortex vs Rust
- Cortex vs PartyKit
- Sourcegraph vs Backstage
- Sourcegraph vs OpsLevel
- Sourcegraph vs Earthly
- Sourcegraph vs Spacelift
- Sourcegraph vs Atlantis
- Sourcegraph vs Depot
- Sourcegraph vs Nix
- Sourcegraph vs SonarQube
- Sourcegraph vs Keycloak
- Sourcegraph vs Ona (formerly Gitpod)
- Sourcegraph vs Vite
- Sourcegraph vs Bazel
- Sourcegraph vs Namespace
- Sourcegraph vs Nixpacks
- Sourcegraph vs Octopus Deploy
- Sourcegraph vs Okteto
- Sourcegraph vs Visual Studio Code
- Sourcegraph vs ESLint
- Sourcegraph vs pnpm
- Sourcegraph vs Turborepo
- Sourcegraph vs Cody
- Sourcegraph vs Sweep
- Sourcegraph vs GitHub Copilot
- Sourcegraph vs Moonrepo
- Sourcegraph vs Pieces for Developers
- Sourcegraph vs Rust
- Sourcegraph vs PartyKit