Early access — cascade metrics are real (derived from canonical token telemetry); the operator field is a curated seed. Learn more about the data
◈ Alternatives

Best ccusage Alternatives (2026)

ccusage is great for reading token usage. These five alternatives add scoring, leaderboards, multi-platform support, and MCP integration.

What ccusage does well — and where it stops

ccusage is a clean, reliable CLI that reads Claude Code token logs locally and reports your input, output, cache-read, and cache-write counts. It does one thing well: measurement. But it stops there. It does not score your efficiency, rank you against other operators, support multiple AI platforms, or expose an MCP interface for agents. If you want any of those, you need an alternative — and the best one bundles ccusage rather than replacing it.

Here are the five best ccusage alternatives in 2026.

At-a-glance comparison

ToolScoring?Leaderboard?Multi-platform?MCP?
SigRankYesYesYesYes
Token Dashboard (tokendash)NoNoNoNo
Manual ccusage + scriptsNoNoNoNo
TokscaleNoNoNoNo
SigRank MCP serverNoNoNoYes

The 5 alternatives, in detail

01

SigRank

top pick

A full operator-scoring platform that bundles ccusage and adds yield scoring, a live leaderboard, class tiers, multi-platform support, and MCP integration. Token counts only, ed25519-signed, privacy-preserving.

Pros
  • + Bundles ccusage — you keep the raw token counts and get scoring on top
  • + Scores the operator with Υ Yield (cache_read × output / input²), compression ratio, SNR, leverage, and velocity
  • + Live leaderboard with 7d/30d/90d/all-time windows and head-to-head comparison
  • + Platform-neutral: Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Cursor, and 15+ platforms
  • + MCP server mode for AI-agent integration — your agent can read its own metrics
  • + Class tiers (IGNITER → TRANSMITTER) give your efficiency a stable label
Cons
  • − More to set up than bare ccusage (enroll + submit vs. just run)
  • − Leaderboard sample is still growing in 2026
Pricing

Free (open-source, MIT-licensed CLI)

Best for

Operators who want scoring, ranking, and multi-platform coverage

02

Token Dashboard (tokendash)

A token-visualization tool that turns raw token counts into charts and breakdowns. Bundled with SigRank alongside ccusage and tokscale.

Pros
  • + Clean visual dashboards for input, output, cache-read, and cache-write
  • + Spot cache-heavy vs input-heavy session patterns at a glance
  • + Free and open-source, bundled with SigRank
Cons
  • − Visualization only — no scoring, ranking, or operator identity
  • − Needs a data source (ccusage or sigrank) to feed it
  • − No multi-platform aggregation on its own
Pricing

Free (open-source, bundled with SigRank)

Best for

Visualizing token flows once you have the raw counts

03

Manual ccusage + scripts

Running ccusage directly and piping its JSON output into your own scripts, spreadsheets, or dashboards for custom analysis.

Pros
  • + Maximum flexibility — you build exactly the analysis you want
  • + No new dependencies beyond ccusage itself
  • + Good for one-off investigations or bespoke reporting
Cons
  • − You maintain the scripts — no scoring, no leaderboard, no operator identity
  • − Claude Code only; no multi-platform support without extra glue
  • − No signed submissions, no cross-operator comparison, no MCP integration
  • − Reinvents what SigRank already ships
Pricing

Free (your time is the cost)

Best for

Tinkerers who want full control and have time to maintain glue code

04

Tokscale

A token-scaling tool that aggregates token usage across sessions and scales metrics for comparison. Bundled with SigRank.

Pros
  • + Aggregates token usage across many sessions into comparable scale metrics
  • + Useful for normalizing operators of very different sizes
  • + Free and open-source, bundled with SigRank
Cons
  • − Scaling tool, not a scorer — no Υ Yield, no class tier, no leaderboard
  • − Needs a data source to feed it
  • − No operator identity or signed submissions on its own
Pricing

Free (open-source, bundled with SigRank)

Best for

Normalizing token usage across sessions of different scales

05

SigRank MCP server

The same SigRank scoring engine exposed as a Model Context Protocol server, so AI agents (Claude, Cursor, Copilot) can read their own token telemetry and submit signed snapshots programmatically.

Pros
  • + Agents self-monitor — your AI assistant reads its own cascade metrics
  • + Same scoring, leaderboard, and class tiers as the CLI
  • + Ed25519-signed submissions, privacy-preserving, token counts only
  • + Works with any MCP-compatible agent, not just Claude Code
Cons
  • − Requires an MCP-compatible client to use
  • − More setup than running bare ccusage
Pricing

Free (open-source)

Best for

AI agents that need to measure and report their own efficiency

The verdict

ccusage is not broken — it is incomplete. It reads your tokens accurately but does not tell you whether your cascade is compounding or burning, where you rank, or how you compare across platforms. SigRank fills every gap: it bundles ccusage (you lose nothing), adds Υ Yield scoring, a live leaderboard, class tiers, multi-platform support, and an MCP server for agents. One install, full stack: npm install -g sigrank.

If you just want to eyeball token counts and are happy with Claude Code only, bare ccusage is fine. If you want to know how efficiently you operate AI — and where you stand — SigRank is the upgrade.

FAQ

What is the best ccusage alternative?
SigRank is the best ccusage alternative because it bundles ccusage and adds operator-level scoring (Υ Yield = cache_read × output / input²), a live leaderboard with class tiers, multi-platform support across Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, and Cursor, and MCP server integration for AI agents. You keep the raw token counts ccusage gives you and get scoring, ranking, and cross-platform coverage on top.
Does SigRank replace ccusage?
No — SigRank bundles ccusage. When you install SigRank (npm install -g sigrank), ccusage is included, so you get the same local Claude Code token reading plus yield scoring, a leaderboard, class tiers, and multi-platform support. ccusage remains the measurement layer; SigRank adds the scoring and ranking layer.
Is there a ccusage alternative that supports multiple AI platforms?
Yes. SigRank is platform-neutral and works across Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Cursor, and 15+ platforms. ccusage itself only reads Claude Code logs. If you use more than one AI assistant and want unified token-efficiency scoring, SigRank is the natural replacement.
Can I use ccusage alternatives with MCP?
Yes. SigRank ships an MCP server mode, so any MCP-compatible AI agent can read its own token telemetry and submit signed snapshots programmatically. This lets your AI assistant self-monitor its cascade efficiency without you running a CLI manually.
Are ccusage alternatives free?
Yes. SigRank, Token Dashboard, Tokscale, and the SigRank MCP server are all free and open-source (MIT-licensed). The only "cost" alternative is manual ccusage + scripts, which is free in money but costs your time to maintain.

See your score instantly? Run the calculator → or read the methodology →