Cursor
Kiro
More places to run agents, AI review on pull requests, and the deepest Enterprise controls, for teams that review at the diff
The better choice when a written spec is the review gate, or when AWS procurement and GovCloud decide the shortlist
- Editor, CLI and cloud agents
- Bugbot code review
- Repo, model and MCP controls
- Spec and task approval
- Published credits
- AWS billing and GovCloud
- Pricing restructured around Grok
- New owner since August 2026
- Spec overhead on small changes
- Own IDE only
Key Takeaways
- Kiro — AWS's agentic IDE and CLI. It writes requirements, a design and a task list for approval before it changes code. Credits are published per plan: Pro is $20 for 1,000 credits, overage $0.04 a credit.
- Cursor — Anysphere's agentic editor, owned by SpaceX since August 2026. Agents in the editor, CLI and cloud, Bugbot code review, and automations. New plans bundle Grok; third-party models are billed at API list price.
- The real difference — Kiro puts the human checkpoint at the spec. Cursor puts it at the diff and the pull request. Pick the one that matches where your reviewers already look.
- Bottom line — Kiro for AWS shops and teams that want a written spec per change. Cursor for teams that want the broadest agent surface and model choice, and accept the new pricing structure.
What is the core difference between Kiro and Cursor?
Both are agentic IDEs: you describe work, and an agent plans, edits files and runs commands. They put the human in different places. Kiro asks you to approve a spec first. It writes requirements, a technical design and a numbered task list, then implements the tasks and checks the result with property-based tests derived from the spec. Cursor starts from the prompt and puts review at the diff and the pull request, where its Bugbot reviewer adds AI comments.
The ownership picture also changed in 2026. AWS named Kiro the successor to the Amazon Q Developer IDE plugins, which reach end of support on April 30, 2027. SpaceX completed its $60 billion acquisition of Cursor's maker, Anysphere, in August 2026, and Cursor's new plans now bundle Grok and X features. Facts below were checked against vendor pages on November 3, 2026.
How do Kiro and Cursor compare feature by feature?
Feature matrix
| Feature | Kiro | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| Product | ||
| Form factor | Own IDE plus Kiro CLI | Own editor, CLI, cloud agents, mobile |
| Owner | Amazon Web Services | SpaceX (acquisition closed August 2026) |
| Core workflow | Spec: requirements, design, tasks, then code | Prompt to agent; plan, edit, review in the editor or cloud |
| Agent and review | ||
| Human checkpoint | Approve spec and task list; checkpoints to rewind | Diff review; Bugbot AI code review on pull requests |
| Background and cloud agents | Hooks run agents on file events; CLI for terminal | Cloud agents and automations on Premium and above |
| Testing against intent | Property-based tests checked against the spec | Agent runs your tests; no spec artifact by default |
| Models and administration | ||
| Models | Auto, Claude, GPT-5.6, open-weight models; credit multipliers | Grok and Composer in the plan pool; Claude, GPT, Gemini at API list price |
| Enterprise controls | SSO, usage analytics, AWS billing, overages off by default | SCIM, audit logs, repo, model and MCP access controls, network controls |
| Government regions | AWS GovCloud (US), about 20% above commercial pricing | Not listed on the pricing page |
| Price (as published, Nov 2026) | ||
| Individual | Free (50 credits); Pro $20; Pro+ $40; Pro Max $100; Power $200 | Free; Plus $8 (Grok only); Premium $30; Super $100; Ultra $200 |
| Teams | Per-developer subscriptions; overage $0.04 a credit | Teams from $30 per user per month; Enterprise custom |
What does Kiro do well?
Kiro's spec is a short document a tech lead can review before work starts, which is easier than reconstructing intent from a large diff afterwards. Steering files hold team conventions, hooks trigger agents on events such as saving a file, and checkpoints rewind agent changes. Pricing is unusually transparent: credits per plan, a $0.04 overage rate, and Enterprise billed through AWS with overages off until an admin turns them on. Full scorecard in the Kiro review.
Kiro
- The spec and task list give reviewers a readable artifact before any code changes
- Usage is published in credits per plan with a fixed overage rate
- Enterprise billing, SSO and GovCloud through AWS; the named path off Amazon Q Developer
- Writing a spec is overhead on small fixes
- Developers must move to Kiro's IDE or CLI; no plugin for other editors
What does Cursor do well?
Cursor runs agents in the editor, in the CLI and in the cloud, with automations for recurring work and Bugbot for pull-request review. Its Enterprise tier lists a long set of controls: SCIM, audit logs, group spend limits, and access controls for repositories, models, MCP servers, auto-run, browser and network use. The pricing changed after the SpaceX deal. New plans run from Plus at $8, which only includes Grok models, to Ultra at $200; Premium at $30 is the first tier with cloud agents, Bugbot and third-party models, which are billed at API list price.
Cursor
- The widest agent surface: editor, CLI, cloud agents, automations and AI code review
- Third-party frontier models available at API list price alongside Cursor's own models
- Granular Enterprise controls over repositories, models, MCP servers and network access
- New plans bundle Grok and X features; third-party model usage is billed separately
- Ownership changed in August 2026; review data terms again before renewal
How much do Kiro and Cursor cost?
| Tier | Kiro (per user/month) | Cursor (per user/month) |
|---|---|---|
| Free | $0, 50 credits | $0, limited usage |
| Entry paid | Pro $20, 1,000 credits | Plus $8 (Grok models only) |
| Main individual tier | Pro+ $40, 2,000 credits | Premium $30, 4x Plus usage, third-party models at API price |
| Heavy use | Pro Max $100 (5,000); Power $200 (10,000) | Super $100 (15x Plus); Ultra $200 (50x Plus) |
| Teams | Per-developer subscriptions, overage $0.04 a credit | From $30 per user, pooled usage |
| Enterprise | Through AWS; GovCloud about 20% higher | Custom |
Prices as published in November 2026 by Kiro and Cursor. Cursor says existing legacy plans continue unless the customer changes them. Model mix drives the bill on both: Kiro charges more credits for some models, and Cursor bills Claude, GPT and Gemini usage separately from the plan pool.
Related questions
- How does Kiro score on autonomy, control and pricing?
- What happened to Windsurf, Cursor's closest rival?
- Devin or Cursor background agents for cloud work?
- Where do humans stay in the loop in an agentic software lifecycle? (partner site CTAIO)
- How should a CTO compare AI coding agents? (partner site CTAIO)
Frequently asked questions
Is Kiro better than Cursor?
For different teams. Kiro is better when you want the agent to produce a reviewable spec and task list before coding, and when you buy through AWS. Cursor is better when you want agents in the editor, terminal and cloud, AI code review on pull requests, and access to many models. Neither is better on every axis.
Is Kiro cheaper than Cursor?
At the entry tier both start around $20 to $30 a month, but they meter differently. As published in November 2026, Kiro Pro is $20 for 1,000 credits with overage at $0.04 a credit. Cursor's new Premium plan is $30 with a shared pool for Grok and Composer models, and Claude, GPT and Gemini usage billed separately at API list price. Compare on your expected model mix, not on the sticker price.
Who owns Cursor now?
SpaceX. It signed a binding all-stock agreement in June 2026 to buy Anysphere, Cursor's maker, at a $60 billion valuation, and completed the acquisition in August 2026. Cursor's leadership said its policies would not change.
Can I use spec-driven development in Cursor?
Yes, as a practice. Open-source toolkits such as GitHub's Spec Kit add spec, plan and task commands to coding agents. The difference is that Kiro builds the spec workflow, property-based tests against the spec and steering files into the product.
Which should you choose?
- Choose Kiro if you buy through AWS, are moving off Amazon Q Developer, or want every agent change to start from a spec your team approves.
- Choose Cursor if your reviewers work in diffs and pull requests, you want cloud agents and AI code review, and you need fine-grained Enterprise controls.
- Consider neither if developers must stay in JetBrains or VS Code: look at Cline.
Sources
- Kiro, Pricing (fetched Nov 3, 2026); SiliconANGLE, AWS launches Kiro general availability, team features and CLI (Nov 17, 2025).
- AWS, Amazon Q Developer end of support announcement (2026).
- Cursor, Pricing (fetched Nov 3, 2026); Codersera, Cursor pricing after SpaceX (Oct 2026).
- The Next Web, SpaceX makes its $60bn Cursor takeover official (Jun 16, 2026); Gigazine, SpaceX officially completes acquisition of Cursor (Aug 16, 2026).
- GitHub, Spec-driven development with AI: Spec Kit (Sep 2, 2025).
Ready to Find the Right AI Tools?
Browse our data-driven rankings to find the best AI tools for your team.