Side by side

CodeMatch vs QuickDup

Both stand on code clone detection tools. Which one you can start free with, which one lets you read the code, and what each costs once you pay.

CodeMatch

Free plan Windows

CodeMatch helps prioritize source-code pairs for expert inspection and provides reports showing what contributed to high scores. Its scores indicate similarity, not a precise finding of plagiarism.

Visit CodeMatch

Choose QuickDup if you want a free, open source way to generate structural code clone candidates for review, including GitHub Actions annotations. Look elsewhere if you need definitive duplicate detection: its heuristic results can include false positives and miss differently structured semantic duplicates.

Visit QuickDup

The facts

	CodeMatch	QuickDup
Free plan	Yes	Yes
Open source	Not published	Not published
Runs on	Windows	Linux, Mac, Windows
Lowest paid plan	Not published	Not published
Plans published	None	None
Maker	Not published	Not published
Website	safe-corp.com	github.com
On code clone detection tools	#14 of 23	#18 of 23

CodeMatch: what it does well

Compares files across two directories and subdirectories.
Ranks file pairs with scores from 0 to 100.
Detailed HTML reports show high-correlation material.
Supports languages including C, Java, Python, and VHDL.
New language support can usually be added within days.

What to know first

Does not precisely pinpoint plagiarized code.
Free use is limited to 1 megabyte of source code.
Runs on Windows.

QuickDup: what it does well

Free and open source under the MIT License.
Offers four detection strategies.
Supports repository scans on Linux, macOS, and Windows.
Can annotate pull requests through GitHub Actions.
Writes scan results as machine-readable JSON.

What to know first

Heuristic results can include false positives.
May miss semantic duplicates with different structure.
Incremental parsed-file caching is limited to word-indent.
No IDE integration is listed.

Alternatives to CodeMatch Alternatives to QuickDup The whole list