Hyper vs Jules (2026)

Hyper

by ASI Flow, Inc.

Jules

by Google

Pros

• ✓Every plan publishes its price and included credit, and each session runs under a hard spending cap with costs shown live.
• ✓Tests and browser flows run in a sandbox and are logged in a verification ledger, Autopilot re-checks each task in a separate verifier before marking it done, and approvals gate deploys, merges, secrets and extra spend.
• ✓Two MCP servers, a REST API, Python and TypeScript SDKs and an A2A endpoint let other agents delegate work to Hyper.

Limitations

• –Verification covers what tests and browser flows can observe: ASI Flow states that it does not prove business correctness.
• –No SOC 2 or ISO 27001 certification yet: ASI Flow lists SOC 2 as on its roadmap and ISO 27001 as planned.
• –Independent validation is still early: two reviews on Product Hunt so far, ASI Flow's open AppBench covers six tasks, and its Terminal-Bench 2.1 run is being published as it runs with no completion rate yet.

Pros

• ✓Runs tasks in the background in a fresh cloud VM and returns a pull request, with a plan to review first and the option to steer while it works.
• ✓Free plan with 15 daily tasks, and paid limits come bundled with Google AI Pro or Ultra subscriptions rather than a separate Jules bill.
• ✓Suggested tasks, scheduled tasks, automatic CI fixes and a Render integration let it keep working on a repository without a new prompt each time.

Limitations

• –Paid plans are limited to personal @gmail.com accounts: Google Workspace and enterprise accounts cannot upgrade yet.
• –MCP connections are limited to a vetted list of servers, so teams cannot plug in their own MCP tools.
• –Setup scripts cannot run long-lived processes such as dev servers, and Google says it works best with JavaScript and TypeScript, Python, Go, Java and Rust.