Continue.dev vs Refact.ai

Continue.dev (Continue (open source)) and Refact.ai (Refact) compared head-to-head: prices from $0 and $0, model-dependent vs. model-dependent context, free tiers, models, limits plus strengths and weaknesses. Find out which AI coding agent fits your workflow.

Continue.dev vs Refact.ai — Category side-by-side

Provider	Continue.dev Continue (open source)	Refact.ai Refact
From /month	Free	Free
Billing	BYO-key (usage)	freemium + credits
Top models	Claude Sonnet 4, GPT-5, Gemini 2.5 Pro, Qwen3	Refact-1.6, frontier models
Context	model-dependent	model-dependent
Limits	whatever your API key allows	Free: daily agent cap; Pro: coin-based
Free tier	free software (model usage billed separately)	yes — personal free tier
Best for	Devs wanting a hackable, provider-agnostic copilot	Teams wanting self-hostable open-weight coding LLMs
Strengths	Fully open source Any local or cloud model VS Code + JetBrains	Open-weight, self-hostable models Autonomous agent Strong free tier
Weaknesses	You manage & pay for model usage Less polish than paid IDEs	Smaller ecosystem Coin accounting takes getting used to

Recommendation by priority

💰 On a budget? Continue.dev ($0) is cheaper than Refact.ai ($0).

Continue.dev is especially strong when you care about "Devs wanting a hackable, provider-agnostic copilot".

Go to Continue.dev → Go to Refact.ai →

Frequently asked questions: Continue.dev vs Refact.ai

Continue.dev or Refact.ai: which is cheaper?

The entry price depends on each provider and plan tier. This page shows the current indicative values side by side.

Which offers more context — Continue.dev or Refact.ai?

Continue.dev reaches model-dependent, Refact.ai reaches model-dependent. More context helps with long files and large repos.

Is there a free tier for Continue.dev or Refact.ai?

Yes — details on free tiers and free quotas are in the side-by-side table above.