Is Codex or Cursor more reliable?

Based on StupidLLM's incident database, Codex has 3 documented failures (avg severity 5.8/10) while Cursor has 4 (avg severity 8.2/10). Codex shows better reliability.

What are the main differences between Codex and Cursor failures?

Codex's most common failure mode is Destructive Action, while Cursor most commonly fails via Security Vulnerability. Codex has 0 critical incidents vs Cursor's 3.

Which has more critical-severity failures?

Cursor has more critical failures (3 vs 0), indicating a higher likelihood of severe, production-impacting incidents.

Should I use Codex or Cursor for production code?

Codex has a lower average failure severity (5.8/10 vs 8.2/10), making it the statistically safer choice for production environments. However, both agents have documented critical incidents — no AI coding agent is risk-free.

How many verified incidents does each agent have?

Codex has 2 verified incidents out of 3 total, while Cursor has 4 verified out of 4. Verified incidents are confirmed against source evidence.

Head to head

Codex vs Cursor

Comparing 3 documented Codex incidents against 4 for Cursor.

Full Codexreport →Full Cursorreport →

Verdict

Codex has the lower average failure severity (5.8/10 vs 8.2/10), making it the statistically safer choice of the two — though both agents have documented critical incidents.