Macroscope vs Graphite

Macroscope catches 2.7X more bugs than Graphite

The Graphite alternative that catches real bugs without the noise, writes the fix, and auto-approves low-risk PRs.

  • Pay per KB reviewed, no seats
  • $100 free credit
  • SOC 2 Type II

By the numbers.

48%

of real-world bugs caught*

Graphite: 18%

76¢

average Balanced review, 55¢ on Budget. Priced per KB with a 10 KB minimum, never per seat.

* September 2025 benchmark of real-world bugs, run before Code Review v3. View results

People seem to like it...

Nick Molnar
Nick Molnar
CTO Ephemera (building XMTP)
We've used just about every AI-driven PR assistant out there: the signal to noise from Macroscope is the best I've seen. The PR descriptions are better than what we would have written by hand, and when it flags an issue it's almost always a real bug.
Marcel Molina
Marcel Molina
CTO & Cofounder, Particle
Macroscope is like having a distinguished engineer tech lead who's read every diff, understands every project, and can answer any question about your codebase instantly. We can finally focus on shipping instead of process.
Jason Toff
Jason Toff
CEO, Things Inc / Rooms.xyz
Within 24 hours of installing Macroscope, engineers on my team said things like, 'wow, that is scary accurate for a very complex thing,' and, 'much better than my own linear summary or Git commit.'

How Macroscope Compares to Graphite

MacroscopeGraphite
Pricing
Usage-based pricing$40 / user / month ("Team" plan)
AI-Powered Bug Detection
Industry-leading bug detection. Caught 2.7X more bugs than Graphite.*
OK, but catches significantly less runtime bugs.*
Noise in Code Review
Top signal-to-noise ratio.
Most quiet, with only 0.6 comments per PR, but catches significantly less bugs.*
Productivity Insights
Built-in productivity analytics.
Lacks productivity analytics; no project classification.
Reports & Macros
Customizable recurring prompts.
Basic dashboards limited to PR metrics.
Integration with Jira and Linear
Context from Jira and Linear tickets.
Doesn't use context from tickets in code review.
Broadcast Code Activity in Slack
Live commit and PR summaries.
No live, real-time stream of activity in Slack.
Query Directly in Slack
Ask your codebase anything.
No code querying capabilities in Slack.
Code Review CLI
Review before you push. Plugins for Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and OpenCode.
gt CLI manages stacked PRs; Diamond reviews run on the PR, not from the terminal.
Check Run Agents
Custom AI reviewers. Plain-English checks, each a named GitHub check run.
No custom AI check runs.
PR Summaries in GitHub
Automated PR Summaries
Automated PR Summaries
* September 2025 benchmark vs CodeRabbit, Greptile, Graphite and Cursor BugBot
View results

* Graphite was evaluated on 115 of the 118 bugs in the dataset, not all of them. Rate limits and availability prevented a consistent sample size across every tool. Detection rates are calculated per tool on the bugs it was actually evaluated on.

The Understanding Engine for Your Codebase

Code Review
Macroscope Code Review works in every language
Python logoPython
TypeScript logoTypeScript
Kotlin logoKotlin
Java logoJava
Rust logoRust
Swift logoSwift
Go logoGo
Python logoPython
TypeScript logoTypeScript
Kotlin logoKotlin
Java logoJava
Rust logoRust
Swift logoSwift
Go logoGo
Higher Signal Reviews graphic

High Signal, Low Noise

The correctness issues you'll want to fix, not style noise.

Deeply Understands your Codebase graphic

Deep Codebase Understanding

Explores the code around each change to find hard-to-detect bugs.

Absorbs context from your tickets graphic

Context from Your Tickets

Reviews every PR against its linked ticket.

Macroscope CLI running /macroscope:codereview in a terminal

Runs from Your Terminal

The same review before you push, in Claude Code, Codex, Cursor and OpenCode.

Security

Keeping your data secure is of paramount importance to us. We have rigorous technical, operational and contractual safeguards in place to protect customer data.

SOC II Compliance
SOC 2 Type II Compliant

Visit our Trust Center to request copies of our audited documentation.

Data encryption
Data Encryption

All customer data is encrypted at rest and in transit.

Code isolation and security
Code Isolation

Customer Code is architecturally isolated and secured by design. None of our employees can access your source code.

No training policy
No Training on Source Code

Macroscope does not train models using your source code, and our agreements with model providers ensure they do not train using your IP.

Frequently Asked Questions

In a benchmark of 115 real runtime bugs, Macroscope detected ~48% vs Graphite Diamond's ~18%. Macroscope provides significantly deeper bug detection with full-repository context.

Macroscope is a strong Graphite Diamond alternative with 2.5x higher bug detection rates in benchmarks. It offers usage-based pricing, Check Run Agents, commit intelligence, and an AI agent.

Macroscope detected 48% of bugs in benchmarks vs Graphite Diamond's 18%. Macroscope is a standalone AI code review platform; Graphite Diamond is a feature within Graphite's PR workflow tool.

Macroscope reads each change, then explores the surrounding code in your repository to understand context beyond the diff. This allows Macroscope to detect subtle bugs that other AI reviewers often miss.

No. Macroscope integrates directly into your existing workflow and is designed to complement your existing tools. Once installed, Macroscope will automatically start summarizing PRs and leaving code review comments directly on GitHub.

Yes. Product managers, engineering managers, customer success teams, and executives use Macroscope to stay informed about what's changing in their product and codebase.

All of them. Macroscope reviews pull requests in every language, so there is no list to check your stack against. Commit and PR summaries, project tracking, and productivity insights work across every language too.

Macroscope is used by startups and enterprise engineering teams alike, from 5-person teams to 100+ engineer orgs.

Teams can get up and running in under 5 minutes. Install the GitHub app, connect Slack (optional), and you're ready! New customers get $100 in usage credit so you can get going right away. It's usage-based, so you only pay for the code you review. Macroscope immediately begins analyzing open PRs and backfilling recent code activity.

Yes. Macroscope installs as a GitHub app and reviews every pull request automatically, posting comments inline the moment a PR opens. Unlike a rules-based bot, it builds a graph of your entire codebase first, so it comments on bugs that matter instead of pattern-matching on style.

Macroscope is usage-based: it bills per KB of diff reviewed, not per developer seat, so your cost tracks how much code you actually ship rather than how many people are on the team. Reviews average 55¢ on Budget and 76¢ on Balanced. New teams start with $100 in usage credit.

Linters and static analysis match patterns inside a single file. Macroscope reads each change in the context of your whole repository, following callers, types and imports across files, so it catches bugs that span files, functions and services, which is the class of bug a linter structurally cannot see. It also means far fewer false positives, because it can tell whether a suspicious line is actually reachable.

Yes, and it is the main reason teams adopt it. When Copilot, Cursor or a coding agent writes most of a pull request, the bottleneck moves from writing code to reviewing it. Macroscope reviews AI-written PRs the same way it reviews human ones, and Approvability auto-approves the low-risk ones so engineers only look at what genuinely needs a human.

It depends what you want it to catch. On our benchmark of real production bugs from open source repositories, Macroscope detected 48% of 118 bugs, the highest rate of the five tools tested. Run the comparison yourself: most teams evaluate on a week of their own pull requests, which is a better signal than any vendor benchmark including ours.

Both, depending on how you use it. As an AI code review platform it reviews every pull request, writes PR summaries, and gives engineering leaders a view of what is shipping. Most teams start with automated PR review on GitHub and adopt the rest later.

Traditional code quality tools score a snapshot of your repository against fixed rules, which is useful for tracking coverage and style but rarely catches a real bug. AI-powered code review reasons about the change itself, in the context of the codebase around it, and tells you what will break. Teams generally keep both: one for hygiene, one for correctness.

Not yet. Macroscope currently supports GitHub, and GitLab and Bitbucket are on the roadmap. If you are on either one, book a demo and we will let you know when support lands.

Ready to Get Started?

Join teams building with Macroscope to catch more bugs and merge PRs faster than ever. Simple usage-based pricing. No seat fees, no surprises.