At a glance
| Point | Cursor Cloud Agents | OpenClowd |
|---|---|---|
| Agent | Cursor's agent and supported model menu. | Existing terminal agents launched as commands on the host. |
| Runtime | Isolated Ubuntu-based machines on Cursor's AWS infrastructure. | Developer-selected infrastructure for self-hosting; managed infrastructure planned later. |
| Access | Cursor editor, web, mobile PWA, Slack, and API. | Planned browser-first desktop and mobile companion surface. |
| Billing | Included plan usage first, then optional on-demand model usage; VM pricing may evolve. | Planned hosting and compute pricing separate from users' AI accounts. |
| Self-hosting | Cursor does not document a self-hosted Cloud Agent runtime. | Self-hosting is intended to be the essential product foundation. |
| Availability | Shipping now on paid plans with limited access on free tiers. | In development and not publicly installable. |
Why the bundle works
One product owns the handoff from prompt to pull request
Cursor can start a remote agent from the editor, browser, phone, Slack, or API, clone the GitHub repository into an isolated environment, and hand the result back into the editor. Environment configuration lives with the repository, and web collaborators can review diffs and merge pull requests.
That integration is hard to match with a collection of independent tools. If Cursor is already the center of your development workflow, its Cloud Agents are the shortest path to hosted work.
The same architecture has a cost
The editor, agent, runtime, and billing move together
Cursor Cloud Agents run Cursor's agent inside Cursor-operated infrastructure and consume Cursor usage. Switching the editor or agent means leaving the integrated cloud workflow with it.
That is product-layer dependence, even when the code lands back in GitHub. The relevant question is not whether you can export a repository. It is whether the hosted environment, setup, session context, and daily control loop remain usable outside the product.
A Git branch is portable. The environment and workflow around it may not be.
Where OpenClowd differs
Keep the CLI agent intact and make the host the stable layer
OpenClowd's intended baseline does not replace the agent's own interface, authentication, or plan. It launches terminal tools where they already run, then organizes sessions and repository context around them.
That separation is more work to set up, and OpenClowd has not shipped it publicly yet. Its value is that a change in agent does not require replacing the host, while a change in host does not require adopting a different agent product.
The decision
Integrated speed or independent layers
Cursor is the stronger immediate product. OpenClowd is the more deliberate ownership model.
Choose Cursor Cloud Agents when Cursor is already your editor and agent, you want a remote workflow now, and seamless editor, GitHub, web, mobile, and Slack handoff outweigh self-hosting.
Follow OpenClowd when you use several terminal agents, want the hosted environment independent of an IDE subscription, or need the option to run the control plane on infrastructure you own.
Questions, answered
What people usually ask next
01Can Cursor Cloud Agents run from a phone?
Yes. Cursor documents a web and mobile Agent surface and an installable PWA for iOS and Android.
02Where does Cursor run cloud agents?
Cursor's security documentation says code runs in isolated VMs on Cursor's AWS infrastructure while the agent is accessible.
03Is OpenClowd cheaper than Cursor?
There is no final Managed OpenClowd price to compare. The products also charge for different layers, so a current single-number claim would be misleading.
Research notes
Sources
Product details change quickly. These first-party pages were checked on .
- 01Cursor Cloud Agents documentation
Remote environments, GitHub access, security model, and environment configuration.
- 02Cursor web and mobile
PWA access, cross-device handoff, collaboration, and Slack integration.
- 03Cursor pricing
Current plans and Cloud Agent availability.