Agentic WeeklyGet the weekly

goose vs opencode: open-source coding agents compared (October 2026)

goose (Apache-2.0, v1.56.0) and opencode (MIT, v1.19.4) are both open-source coding agents with a CLI and a desktop app that work with many model providers, and we smoke-tested both on 2026-10-25 with a small local model. goose's latest release adds resumable subagents and a concurrency limit; opencode's is mainly a runtime security upgrade. Neither test used a hosted frontier model, so this is not a quality ranking.

Our pick: Pick goose for people who want an Apache-2.0 agent with a desktop app and CLI; pick opencode for developers who want an MIT-licensed terminal agent. No overall winner: we have not benchmarked them against each other. Updated (America/Chicago).

By Agentic Weekly, operated independently from Texas, US · Published · Last updated (America/Chicago) · How we work

Evidence: Tested (smoke test) for both tools on 2026-10-25 (America/Chicago), using a small local open-weight model (Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct, 4-bit, via Ollama 0.40.11) on a Linux box with no GPU. We tested the tools, not any vendor's hosted models. Licenses and release contents are Reported from each project's GitHub pages.

goose

aaif-goose (GitHub organization, previously block/goose) · v1.56.0

Tested (smoke test)

Pick goose if you want an open-source agent with real subagent controls; v1.56.0 is a solid, subagent-heavy update.

opencode

anomalyco (GitHub organization) · v1.19.4

Tested (smoke test)

Update when convenient for the runtime security fixes; pick opencode if you want an open-source agent that is not tied to one model vendor.

Side by side, from what we recorded

Each row compares one recorded fact for both tools. Rows are not weighted and nothing is added up into a score; the note under each row says what the marker means.

  • Evidence

    Tested (smoke test) for goose
    Tested (smoke test) for opencode

    Tested = we ran it (smoke test); Reported = we read official sources

  • Smoke-test result

    Partly worked for goose
    Partly worked for opencode

    Each tool's own smoke test on the same CPU-only machine; tasks differ unless the logs say otherwise

  • Editorial rank: AI coding agents

    #8 for goose
    #6 (opencode is ahead on this row) for opencode

    Lower is higher on our list; an editorial pick, not a benchmark

  • Release date

    Oct 23, 2026 (goose is ahead on this row) for goose
    Oct 22, 2026 for opencode

    Newer date only; says nothing about quality

  • Pricing we could verify

    Not verified for goose
    Not verified for opencode

    About our evidence only, not about the price

  • Steps in our setup guide

    3 for goose
    3 for opencode

    Counts our guide's steps, not difficulty

  • Sources we cite

    2 for goose
    2 for opencode

    How much we had to read; more is not better

A list of recorded differences, not a quality score or a ranking. We have not benchmarked these tools against each other; the smoke-test row links each tool's own log. How we label evidence.

What we measured

We ran both goose and opencode ourselves; the table links each full test log. These are smoke tests on one CPU-only machine, not benchmarks. Both ran the same task on the same local model, so the two results are comparable on that one task only. Model-driven runs used a small local Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct model.

Our own tests for goose and opencode
Testgooseopencode
Hands-on test log (install and a real task)Tested: goose 1.56.0, Oct 25, 2026: partly worked. goose 1.56.0 edited calc.py on the second headless run with a local 3B model (19.4 s); the first run called the edit tool but its text did not match, so the file did not… Full test logTested: opencode 1.19.4, Oct 25, 2026: partly worked. opencode 1.19.4 edited calc.py on the second headless run with a local 3B model; the first run tried the wrong path (src/calc.py) and failed. Full test log

How we test and label results: methodology. All test logs: test hub.

goose vs opencode at a glance

goose and opencode side by side (GitHub pages and our test, 2026-10-25)
Featuregooseopencode
Projectaaif-goose/goose on GitHub (the project moved organizations, so older links may differ)anomalyco/opencode on GitHub
LicenseApache-2.0MIT, per the GitHub repository
InterfacesCLI and desktop appCLI and desktop app
Model providersWorks with many LLMs; you pick a providerWorks with many providers, including custom OpenAI-compatible ones
Latest version coveredv1.56.0 (released 2026-10-23)v1.19.4 (released 2026-10-22)
What the latest release saysResumable subagents, concurrency limit, automatic thinking level, Windows desktop installer, IO Intelligence providerBun runtime upgraded to 1.4.4 with network-stack security fixes; refreshed root certificates
Smoke test resultEdit worked with exact strings after a first failed attemptEdit worked once the path was stated after a first attempt on the wrong path
Evidence on this siteTested (smoke test)Tested (smoke test)
Last verified2026-10-252026-10-25

What we ran, and what we did not

On 2026-10-25 we ran both on a Linux x86_64 box with 8 CPUs and no GPU, with no vendor account or API key. Both were pointed at the same small local model, Qwen2.5-3B-Instruct (4-bit) on Ollama 0.40.11, and given the same style of task: change a-b to a+b in calc.py.

  • goose: the official install script stopped because bzip2 was missing, so we unpacked the same release archive by hand; goose --version printed 1.56.0. goose run --no-session with the Ollama provider: attempt 1 called the edit tool but the text did not match and the file stayed unchanged; attempt 2, with exact before and after strings, printed "Edited calc.py" and the file changed.
  • opencode: installed opencode-ai 1.19.4 from npm and ran opencode run headless with a custom OpenAI-compatible provider pointing at the local model. Attempt 1 edited the wrong path (src/calc.py) and failed; attempt 2, with the path stated, edited calc.py and showed the diff.
  • Not tested: goose subagents, resume and limits, and the desktop app; opencode's v2 installer, the @opencode/cli 2.x package, the desktop app and the Bun security fixes; any hosted frontier model.

This is not a benchmark. Both needed explicit instructions with a 3B model, and results with stronger models may differ. Full notes are on the goose and opencode pages.

Where they differ (Reported)

Differences visible in each project's release notes
Featuregooseopencode
Recent focusSubagents: resume failed or cancelled delegate subagents; limit concurrency with GOOSE_MAX_CONCURRENT_SUBAGENTS; view-only subagent sessions in the UIRuntime hardening: the notes say the bundled Bun upgrade includes fixes for Brotli, TLS, HTTP/1.1, HTTP/2, HTTP/3, WebSocket and fetch
DesktopWindows NSIS installer for the desktop app in v1.56.0README lists a desktop app cask
Install routesOfficial download script (we hit a missing-bzip2 error and unpacked the archive), plus the desktop appInstall script, npm, Homebrew, desktop app cask; the README now points at a v2 installer
Release notes qualityItemised by featureBrief for v1.19.4
Our rank on best AI coding agentsSee best AI coding agentsSee best AI coding agents

Version numbers and dates come from each project's GitHub release page, read on 2026-10-25. Both projects ship quickly, so check the releases pages for newer versions.

Cost

Both are free, open-source software. Neither charges for the tool itself; what you pay for is the model you connect. goose's release notes mention a new IO Intelligence provider and opencode works with many providers, so cost depends on which provider and model you choose. We ran both at no cost against a local model.

Pick goose if / pick opencode if

  • Pick goose if you want to delegate work to subagents with resume and concurrency limits, or you want a Windows desktop installer, and Apache-2.0 suits you.
  • Pick opencode if you want an MIT-licensed terminal agent that is not tied to one model vendor and you want to wire up a custom OpenAI-compatible provider.
  • Expect to be specific. In our runs both needed the file path or exact strings stated before a small local model made the edit.
  • Looking at paid or vendor-backed tools instead? See Claude Code vs Codex CLI and what is an AI coding agent.

FAQ

Is goose or opencode better?

We cannot rank them on quality. We smoke-tested both on 2026-10-25 using a small local model, and both needed explicit instructions. goose's latest release focuses on subagents; opencode's is a runtime security upgrade.

Are goose and opencode free?

The software is free and open source: goose under Apache-2.0 and opencode under MIT. Model usage costs depend on the provider you connect.

Do goose and opencode have a desktop app?

Yes, both offer a desktop app as well as a CLI. goose v1.56.0 added a Windows desktop installer. We did not test either desktop app.

Can goose and opencode use local models?

In our test both worked with a local Ollama model: goose through its Ollama provider and opencode through a custom OpenAI-compatible provider. A 3B model needed exact instructions.

Did you test goose and opencode?

Yes, a smoke test of each on 2026-10-25 with a small local model and no vendor account. We did not test goose subagents or either desktop app.

What changed in goose v1.56.0 and opencode v1.19.4?

goose v1.56.0 added resumable subagents, a concurrency limit, subagent session links, automatic thinking level, a Windows desktop installer and an IO Intelligence provider. opencode v1.19.4 upgraded the bundled Bun runtime to 1.4.4 and refreshed root certificates.

Sources

Page history

  • : First published. Facts read from the official pages listed under Sources on this date.

Markdown version for agents: /compare/goose-vs-opencode.md