Pick Kiro if you want the tool to write down requirements, a design, and a task list before it touches code, and you like a monthly bill measured in pre-paid credits. Pick Cursor if you want to ask for a change and get it now, lean on tab completion all day, and are comfortable with usage billed at model API prices. Both have a free tier and a $20 entry plan, so the cheapest way to settle it is to run one real task through each.
One change matters more than any feature comparison as of September 30, 2026: Cursor is now owned by SpaceX, and OpenAI has said it will stop serving its models to Cursor, with a proposed shutoff on November 12, 2026. If your Cursor work runs on GPT models, read what changed for Cursor in 2026 before you renew.
Kiro vs Cursor at a glance
Prices are per user per month in US dollars, before tax, as of September 30, 2026, from kiro.dev/pricing and Cursor's models and pricing docs.
| Kiro | Cursor | |
|---|---|---|
| Who makes it | Built and operated by AWS; no AWS account needed to sign up | Cursor (Anysphere), acquired by SpaceX in August 2026 |
| Default way of working | Spec mode: requirements → design → tasks, then code; vibe mode for quick chat edits | Agent and Tab: ask for a change, review the diff; planning is optional |
| Free tier | Kiro Free: 50 credits a month, Claude Sonnet 4.5 and open-weight models, rate-limited | Hobby: no card, limited Agent requests, access to Composer |
| Individual paid plans | Pro $20 · Pro+ $40 · Pro Max $100 · Power $200 | Pro $20 · Pro Plus $60 · Ultra $200 |
| What you are billed in | Credits (1,000 on Pro up to 10,000 on Power) | Two usage pools: Cursor Models and Other Models at API prices |
| Going past the plan | Pre-paid add-on credits at $0.04 each | On-demand usage at the same API rates, billed in arrears |
| Where it runs | IDE (Code OSS based), CLI, web, mobile preview, Kiro Crew | Editor, CLI, Cloud Agents, mobile, Bugbot code review |
Workflow: Kiro writes a spec first, Cursor edits on request
Kiro: a spec before the code
Kiro's specs turn a feature request into three files in your repo:
requirements.md(orbugfix.mdfor a bug) with user stories and acceptance criteria, or the current, expected, and unchanged behavior of the bug.design.mdwith the architecture, sequence diagrams, error handling, and testing approach.tasks.mdwith discrete implementation tasks that update their status as Kiro works through them.
You approve each phase before the next one starts, and you can go Requirements-First or Design-First. When the feature is well understood, Quick Spec generates all three files in one pass without the approval gates. Running all tasks in a spec makes Kiro build a dependency graph and execute independent tasks in parallel waves. Analyze Requirements (IDE and CLI) checks the requirements for gaps and contradictions, and in the IDE Kiro can also check behavior with property-based tests.
For small edits you do not need a spec at all: vibe mode works like a normal chat agent. Steering files carry your project rules across the IDE, CLI, and web, hooks run agent tasks automatically on predefined triggers, and powers cost nothing extra.
The payoff is a written trail of what was asked for and why the code looks the way it does. The cost is time spent reviewing documents before any code appears, and credits spent on generating and refining them.
Cursor: ask, review, keep going
Cursor starts from the code. You describe a change to the Agent, it edits files, and you accept or push back. Tab completion runs as you type and is unlimited on every paid plan. Planning exists, but it is something you ask for rather than a gate the tool enforces. Augment Code's March 2026 comparison sums it up the same way: Kiro gates code behind requirements, design, and task documents, while Cursor generates code on demand.
Paid plans also include Cloud Agents and Bugbot for automated code review. MCP servers, skills, and hooks are available on individual plans too, so the extension points overlap more than the workflows suggest.
Does the difference show up in practice?
Some r/kiroIDE users who tried both say there is not much difference in daily results, and a common view on r/cursor is that Cursor is better but costs more. The overlap explains part of that: Kiro has vibe mode for quick edits, and Cursor can plan when asked. The real difference is the default. Kiro nudges you toward documents first, and Cursor toward code first, so pick the tool whose default you would not have to fight every day.
Pricing: credits vs usage pools
Both tools start at $20, then diverge on how that money is counted.
| Monthly price | Kiro | Cursor |
|---|---|---|
| $0 | Free: 50 credits | Hobby: limited Agent requests |
| $20 | Pro: 1,000 credits | Pro: both usage pools, unlimited Tab |
| $40 | Pro+: 2,000 credits | Teams Standard seat (per user) |
| $60 | none | Pro Plus (shown as Pro+ on Cursor's pricing page): more included usage; Cursor's pick for daily agent users |
| $100 | Pro Max: 5,000 credits | none |
| $120 | none | Teams Premium seat: 5× the Standard Agent limits |
| $200 | Power: 10,000 credits | Ultra: Cursor's pick for agent power users |
Kiro sells its per-user plans to teams of up to 500. Cursor's Teams plan adds centralized billing, SSO, and Bugbot for the team, and both vendors quote Enterprise separately. Cursor also sells a Start plan in India for ₹649 a month, tax included, which covers the Cursor Models pool but not Other Models.
What a Kiro credit buys
A credit is Kiro's unit of work. A simple prompt can use less than one credit, a spec task usually uses more, and usage is metered to 0.01 credit. The model you pick multiplies the cost. Kiro's default, Auto, is the 1.0× baseline; kiro.dev lists, among others:
- Claude Sonnet 5, 4.6, and 4.5 at 1.3×, Claude Opus 5.5 at 2.0×, Claude Opus 5 at 2.2×, Claude Haiku 4.5 at 0.4×
- GPT-5.6 Sol at 4.4×, GPT-5.6 Terra at 2.2×, GPT-5.6 Luna at 1.1×
- Open-weight models such as DeepSeek 3.2 at 0.25×, GLM-5 at 0.5×, and Qwen3 Coder Next at 0.05×
So a task that takes 10 credits on Auto takes 13 on Claude Sonnet 4.6 and 44 on GPT-5.6 Sol. Model availability varies by country and region.
Two billing rules decide whether to buy add-ons or move up a tier:
- Plan credits cost $0.02 each on every paid tier ($20 ÷ 1,000 on Pro, $200 ÷ 10,000 on Power). Add-on credits cost $0.04 each, sold in packs from $5 (125 credits) to $100.
- Plan credits reset each billing month; add-on credits roll over and expire 12 months after purchase.
On Pro, 500 add-on credits cost 500 × $0.04 = $20, the same as moving to Pro+, which adds 1,000 credits. If you run out every month by more than 500 credits, upgrade. If you only overflow now and then, add-ons are cheaper and keep for a year. Upgrading mid-month charges the price difference for the whole month and gives you the higher allocation right away.
Your first paid upgrade through social login or AWS Builder ID gets $20 credited toward the subscription, prorated to the days left in that month. Kiro bills subscriptions on the 1st of each month, and the in-app dashboard updates credit usage at least every 5 minutes.
What Cursor's plan price buys
Cursor's Pro, Pro Plus, and Ultra plans each include two separate pools that reset with your billing cycle:
- Cursor Models covers Grok 4.7, Grok 4.6, Grok 4.5, and Composer 2.5, with what Cursor calls significantly more included usage.
- Other Models covers third-party models such as Claude, Gemini, and GPT, charged against the pool at each model's API price.
Cursor's models page lists per-token prices but not the size of each plan's pools in dollars. What it does give is guidance on typical total usage: daily Tab users and light Agent users usually stay within the included amount, daily Agent users typically land at $60–$100 a month, and power users running several agents often pass $200. That is why Cursor itself recommends Pro Plus for daily agent users and Ultra for power users.
Model choice changes how fast a pool drains. Prices are per million tokens:
| Model | Pool | Input | Output |
|---|---|---|---|
| Composer 2.5 | Cursor Models | $0.50 | $2.50 |
| Grok 4.7 | Cursor Models | $2 | $6 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Other Models | $2 | $10 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | Other Models | $4 | $20 |
As an example, an agent session that reads 2 million input tokens and writes 200,000 output tokens, ignoring caching, costs 2 × $2 + 0.2 × $10 = $6 on Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 2 × $0.50 + 0.2 × $2.50 = $1.50 on Composer 2.5. Past the included amount, on-demand usage continues at the same rates and is billed after the month ends. On Teams and Enterprise, third-party models also carry a Cursor Token Rate of $0.25 per million tokens.
Why you can't convert one into the other
A Kiro credit is a unit of work scaled by a model multiplier. Cursor's pools are dollars of API-priced tokens, and Cursor's docs don't state the pool sizes. Neither vendor offers an exchange rate, so "1,000 Kiro credits equals X Cursor requests" is a number nobody can back up. The only honest comparison is your own: run the same task in both and read Kiro's credit counter next to Cursor's usage dashboard.
What changed for Cursor in 2026
Two announcements in August changed the model picture for Cursor users:
- August 14, 2026: Cursor announced it had been acquired by SpaceX, completing a process that began with a SpaceXAI partnership in April. Cursor says the deal gives it access to SpaceX's GPU fleet; Grok 4.6 shipped as an early joint model.
- August 28, 2026: OpenAI said it will wind down the contract that provides OpenAI models to Cursor, with a proposed shutoff on November 12, 2026, and that it will not provide future models, naming the upcoming Astra, to Cursor.
What that means in practice:
- If you use GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, or Luna in Cursor, plan for them to stop working around November 12. Cursor's pricing and models docs don't name a replacement.
- Claude and Gemini models are still listed in Cursor's Other Models pool, and the Grok and Composer models are Cursor's own.
- Kiro lists GPT-5.6 Sol, Terra, and Luna among its selectable models, subject to regional availability, so a GPT-dependent workflow can move there. Check the credit multipliers above before assuming the same monthly cost.
Kiro or Cursor: which is better and which one to choose
| Your situation | Start with | Why | What would change it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Solo work, small fixes, heavy autocomplete | Cursor Pro ($20) | Unlimited Tab and on-demand Agent edits | You keep wishing you had a written plan for larger features |
| Team features that need reviewable requirements | Kiro Pro or Pro+ ($20 or $40) | Specs leave requirements, design, and tasks in the repo | Reviews feel slow; try Quick Spec or vibe mode before switching |
| You rely on GPT models | Kiro, or Cursor with Claude, Gemini, Grok, or Composer | OpenAI access in Cursor has a proposed end date of November 12, 2026 | Cursor announces a replacement you are happy with |
| You want a fixed, predictable bill | Kiro | Pre-paid credits, no daily or weekly rate limits on paid plans, add-ons bought in advance | You would rather pay for actual usage after the fact |
| You run the agent all day | Cursor Pro Plus ($60) or Kiro Pro+ / Pro Max | Cursor's own estimate for daily Agent users is $60–$100 a month; on Kiro, watch the credit counter | Your first month's usage lands well above or below the plan |
| You mainly use Grok or Composer | Cursor | They sit in the Cursor Models pool with more included usage | You need GPT or AWS identity integration |
| Your company runs on AWS IAM Identity Center | Kiro | Enterprise sign-in, usage dashboards, and billing through AWS | Your team has already standardized on Cursor Enterprise |
How to test Kiro and Cursor before paying
- Install Kiro and sign in with GitHub, Google, or AWS Builder ID. Kiro Free gives you 50 credits a month with Claude Sonnet 4.5 and open-weight models, subject to rate limits.
- Install Cursor on the Hobby plan. No credit card is needed, and Agent requests are limited.
- Pick one small, real task in your own repository, such as adding an endpoint with tests. Keep it small: spec tasks usually cost more than one credit each.
- In Kiro, run it as a spec (Quick Spec if you want to skip approvals) and note the credits used on the dashboard.
- In Cursor, ask the Agent for the same change and note how many follow-up prompts it needed.
- Compare what matters to you: the diff you would actually merge, the time you spent reviewing, and whether Kiro's documents were worth reading.
If you upgrade Kiro afterward, do it through social login or Builder ID to get the $20 first-upgrade credit.
If you are also weighing a terminal agent instead of an IDE, Claude Code vs Codex in 2026: Which Coding Agent Should You Use Now? compares those two. For the cost side, see Claude Code Pricing: Pro vs Max and When the Upgrade Pays Off and Claude Code Free Trial in 2026: Does It Exist, Who Qualifies, and What to Do Next.
FAQ
Is Cursor owned by Elon Musk?
Cursor is owned by SpaceX, Elon Musk's company. Cursor announced the completed acquisition on August 14, 2026. It followed a partnership with SpaceXAI that began in April, which is why Grok models feature heavily in Cursor's plans.
Is Kiro free?
Yes, with limits. Kiro Free is a permanent tier with 50 credits a month, access to Claude Sonnet 4.5 and open-weight models, and rate limits. It is not available in Kiro Enterprise or the AWS GovCloud (US) Regions, and add-on credits require a paid plan.
Is Kiro worth it in 2026?
It is worth paying for if you will actually use specs, because that is what Kiro does differently. Pro at $20 with 1,000 credits is the sensible first step. If you mostly want quick edits and autocomplete, the spec workflow adds review time you may not want.
Do I need an AWS account to use Kiro?
No. Kiro is built and operated by AWS, but you can sign in with GitHub, Google, or AWS Builder ID. Companies can connect it to AWS IAM Identity Center instead.
Can I bring my VS Code setup to Kiro?
Yes. Kiro's IDE is based on Code OSS, so onboarding can import your VS Code settings and themes, plus extensions available on Open VSX.
What happens to GPT models in Cursor after November 12, 2026?
OpenAI has proposed November 12, 2026 as the date it stops providing its models to Cursor, and says Cursor will not get future OpenAI models. Cursor's pricing and models docs don't say what replaces them. If GPT models are central to your work, test Claude, Gemini, Grok, or Composer in Cursor now, or try GPT-5.6 in Kiro.
