A platform for humans, or memory for your assistant.

Two very different jobs

Let's start with what Sourcegraph is genuinely great at, because it's a lot. Sourcegraph is a code-intelligence platform: it indexes the repositories across your whole organization and gives engineers fast search, precise code navigation, and tooling for large-scale changes. If your company has thousands of repos and your engineers regularly ask "where else is this used?" across all of them, Sourcegraph does that job about as well as anything on the market. Graphify is a different shape entirely: an MIT-licensed CLI that builds a knowledge graph of your codebase on your own machine and exposes it, over MCP and the command line, to the coding assistant you already use. Sourcegraph is a destination your engineers visit. Graphify is memory your assistant carries.

Who does the reading

The deepest difference isn't hosting — it's the reader. Sourcegraph's primary consumer is a human at a search box: you type a query, you read the results, you click through to the code. Graphify's primary consumer is a model in the middle of a task. When Cursor, Claude Code, or Copilot needs to know what calls a function, what a change would break, or why a module exists, it queries the graph directly and follows typed edges from question to answer — no context-window archaeology, no guessing from snippets. That's why the answers come back with provenance: every relationship is tagged EXTRACTED (parsed from the AST with tree-sitter), INFERRED (derived by your own model from docs and prose), or AMBIGUOUS (flagged, not asserted). A search result asks you to read; a traversal shows its work.

Nothing to deploy, nowhere your code goes

Sourcegraph is a platform: whether you use their cloud or run it self-hosted, someone deploys it, connects repos, and administers access. That's a reasonable cost for org-wide infrastructure. Graphify has no server side at all. You install a CLI, it parses your code locally, and the graph sits on disk next to your repo — no telemetry, no account, no vendor holding an index of your source. It's free because there's nothing to meter. For teams that need shared verification, review, and digest workflows on top of that, Graphify Enterprise (early access) runs self-hosted in your own VPC — the same rule applies: your code stays inside your walls.

When Sourcegraph is the better fit

Honestly: often, for the job it was built for. Choose Sourcegraph when you need org-wide code search across many repositories, when precise cross-repo navigation for human engineers is the daily workflow, when you run large-scale change campaigns across the codebase, or when you want a supported platform with an admin surface and someone to call. Graphify doesn't index your organization, doesn't have a search UI, and isn't trying to be your engineers' home page. If the sentence "every engineer searches all our code" describes your need, buy the platform.

Which fits you

Solo developers and small teams: an enterprise platform is more than the job needs. uv tool install graphifyy, and your assistant has a map of your codebase in minutes — see the docs.

Teams betting on AI-assisted development: the bottleneck is what your assistant knows, not what your engineers can search. Graphify plugs into the assistants you already runand gives each developer's agent the same connected picture.

Large organizations:these tools aren't rivals. Keep (or adopt) org-wide search for humans; add on-device graphs where the AI work happens. If you also need verification and review across teams, that's the enterprise track.

For the more general argument about why a typed graph beats retrieval over chunks, see Graphify vs RAG, or browse all comparisons.