Comparison
aibill vs ccusage
First, credit where it's due: ccusage is excellent. It's mature, fast, widely used, and it popularized the idea that local coding-agent logs can tell you what usage would cost at API rates. It now documents both Claude Code and Codex support. If you want a detailed local usage readout, it's a strong choice.
aibill starts from the same insight — read the logs you already have — and asks the next question: okay, that's the number. Now what? It adds API-rate comparison beside plan context, evidence-ranked candidates with approval and matched future-session comparison, hook-aware Context Health, and optional official provider cost reports kept separate from local estimates.
| aibill | ccusage | |
|---|---|---|
| Local agent coverage | Claude Code + Codex | 15 local sources; Codex support is experimental |
| Claude Code session logs | Yes | Yes |
| Codex session logs | Yes | Yes — documented as beta |
| Estimates usage at API-equivalent rates | Yes | Yes |
| Primary focus | Evidence-constrained spend decisions | Detailed local usage and cost reporting |
| Adds official provider cost reports (user-referenced OpenAI/Anthropic admin credential) | Connector validation: live_verified on non-empty Admin API data; tested OpenAI Costs reconciled to invoiced credits less the UI balance with $0.00 variance. Final invoices remain separate and financial evidence stays labeled per row | Not a stated focus |
| Subscription-vs-API plan math | API-rate comparison beside detected/declared plan; no entitlement inference | Block, quota, and usage reporting |
| Evidence-ranked action candidates | Observed exposure locally; modeled $ only with a source-supported counterfactual | — |
| Context inventory and invocation coverage | Yes — loading/overhead stays unmeasured where the host does not expose it | — |
| Local-first analysis | Yes | Yes |
| Open source | MIT | MIT |
| Install | npx aibill | npx ccusage |
Reviewed against ccusage's documentation on July 28, 2026 — check ccusage.com for the current feature set. “—” means not a stated focus, not necessarily absent.
aibill's validation labels describe connector coverage, not the financial evidence of every number. Local log values remain estimates even when their reader is live_verified.
Which should you use?
Use ccusage when detailed Claude Code or Codex usage reporting is the job. Use aibill when you want the decision layer on top: plan economics, evidence-backed actions, and — when you connect an user-referenced admin billing credential — official provider cost reports beside local estimates. Both are free and local-first; running both is a sensible comparison.