Is Cursor or GitHub Copilot more reliable?

Based on StupidLLM's incident database, Cursor has 4 documented failures (avg severity 8.2/10) while GitHub Copilot has 6 (avg severity 7.8/10). GitHub Copilot shows better reliability.

What are the main differences between Cursor and GitHub Copilot failures?

Cursor's most common failure mode is Security Vulnerability, while GitHub Copilot most commonly fails via Security Vulnerability. Cursor has 3 critical incidents vs GitHub Copilot's 3.

Which has more critical-severity failures?

Both Cursor and GitHub Copilot have 3 critical-severity incidents.

Should I use Cursor or GitHub Copilot for production code?

GitHub Copilot has a lower average failure severity (7.8/10 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?

Cursor has 4 verified incidents out of 4 total, while GitHub Copilot has 6 verified out of 6. Verified incidents are confirmed against source evidence.

Head to head

Cursor vs GitHub Copilot

Comparing 4 documented Cursor incidents against 6 for GitHub Copilot.

Full Cursorreport →Full GitHub Copilotreport →

Verdict

GitHub Copilot has the lower average failure severity (7.8/10 vs 8.2/10), making it the statistically safer choice of the two — though both agents have documented critical incidents.