Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Sourcegraph vs VerneMQ

Sourcegraph logo

Sourcegraph

Developer Tools

Code search and intelligence platform for large codebases with Cody AI assistant

From
$16000/year
Free plan
No
Visit SourcegraphFull review
VerneMQ logo

VerneMQ

Databases

Erlang MQTT broker whose source is Apache 2.0 but whose official binaries need a paid subscription

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Visit VerneMQFull review

The short version

  • Sourcegraph is an enterprise code intelligence platform.
  • VerneMQ is free; Sourcegraph starts at $16000/yr.
  • Where Sourcegraph falls short: enterprise pricing starting at $16k annually creates significant barrier for small teams.
  • Where VerneMQ falls short: there is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service.
  • Prices and features on this page were last checked on 13 November 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Sourcegraph and VerneMQ actually diverge.

Attributes where Sourcegraph and VerneMQ differ
AttributeSourcegraphVerneMQ
Starting price$16000/yearFree
Pricing modelSubscriptionQuote
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, Self-hostedLinux, Self-hosted, macOS
CategoryDeveloper ToolsDatabases

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 Sourcegraph

Nothing recorded that VerneMQ does not also cover.

Only in VerneMQ

  • Erlang/OTP clustering
  • MQTT 5.0 support
  • Plugin system
  • Backpressure handling
  • Bridge support
  • Metrics export
  • MQTT over WebSockets
  • Pluggable auth backends

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Sourcegraph

  • Large-scale code migrations across hundreds of repositoriesnot VerneMQ
  • Enterprise governance and code ownership trackingnot VerneMQ
  • AI-assisted bug hunting and security pattern detectionnot VerneMQ
  • Onboarding engineers into large unfamiliar codebasesnot VerneMQ
  • Regulatory compliance and code audit trailsnot VerneMQ

VerneMQ

  • An industrial operator that wants an MQTT broker with predictable memory behaviour and no data integration features it will not usenot Sourcegraph
  • A team building from source to stay strictly under Apache 2.0 terms with no vendor licence entanglementnot Sourcegraph
  • A deployment needing custom authentication logic implemented as a plugin in Lua or over a webhooknot Sourcegraph
  • An organisation that wants a broker maintained by a small European company rather than by a vendor that keeps changing licencesnot Sourcegraph

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

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

VerneMQ

  • The official binaries and Docker images are not Apache 2.0 but sit under a EULA requiring a yearly commercial subscription, a distinction easy to miss and awkward to discover during a licence audit
  • Octavo Labs is a very small company, so support depth, response times and the bus factor on the codebase are materially thinner than at HiveMQ or EMQ
  • There is no data integration or rule engine layer, so routing messages into a database means writing and operating your own consumer service
  • Operating an Erlang cluster requires runtime knowledge that most teams do not have and will use for nothing else in their stack
  • There is no vendor-managed cloud offering, so every deployment is self-operated with the infrastructure and on-call cost that implies

Pricing, plan by plan

Sourcegraph

$16000/year
  • Enterprise$16,000/yr
    • Scales with team size
    • Credits for AI features per user
    • Deep Search

VerneMQ

Free
  • Source buildFree
    • Apache 2.0 licensed source from GitHub
    • Full clustering and plugin capability
    • You compile and package it yourself
  • Binary packages and Docker imagesOn request
    • Covered by the VerneMQ EULA, not Apache 2.0
    • Yearly usage subscription expected for commercial use
    • Official builds and Docker images
  • Commercial supportOn request
    • Evaluation, customisation and operations assistance
    • Custom development
    • Long-term maintenance agreements

Which should you pick?

Choose Sourcegraph if

  • You work on Web, Self-hosted.
Sourcegraph review

Choose VerneMQ if

  • You need erlang/otp clustering.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Self-hosted, macOS.
  • You also want mqtt 5.0 support.
VerneMQ review

Questions people ask

Is Sourcegraph or VerneMQ better?
Neither clearly leads. Sourcegraph starts at $16000/year and VerneMQ at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Sourcegraph or VerneMQ?
VerneMQ has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at $16000/year for Sourcegraph and Free for VerneMQ.
Does Sourcegraph or VerneMQ run on more platforms?
Sourcegraph runs on Web, Self-hosted. VerneMQ runs on Linux, Self-hosted, macOS.
Can I use VerneMQ for free?
Yes. VerneMQ has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Sourcegraph starts at $16000/year.
What is Sourcegraph best used for?
Sourcegraph is most often used for large-scale code migrations across hundreds of repositories, enterprise governance and code ownership tracking, ai-assisted bug hunting and security pattern detection, onboarding engineers into large unfamiliar codebases. Of those, large-scale code migrations across hundreds of repositories and enterprise governance and code ownership tracking are not what VerneMQ is typically brought in for.
What can Sourcegraph do that VerneMQ cannot?
VerneMQ covers Erlang/OTP clustering, MQTT 5.0 support, Plugin system, Backpressure handling.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

VerneMQ: Is VerneMQ free?

The source is Apache 2.0 and free. The official binary packages and Docker images are covered by a separate EULA that expects a yearly fee for commercial use.

VerneMQ: Is the project still maintained?

Yes. Octavo Labs AG in Zurich continues to publish 2.x releases, most recently in 2026.

VerneMQ: Does it have a managed cloud?

No. Every deployment is self-hosted, with commercial support available from Octavo Labs.

VerneMQ: How does it compare to EMQX?

Narrower in features and without a rule engine, but with a simpler licence story for source builds after EMQX moved to BSL.

Share

Related pages

More on Sourcegraph

More on VerneMQ

Keep looking

Other head to heads