Home / Compare / Aikido AI AutoFix vs Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents)

Aikido AI AutoFix vs Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents)

Quick answer

Aikido AI AutoFix (Aikido Security) and Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents) (Legit Security (Legit Security Ltd)) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index.

They share no framework tags in our dataset.

This is not a ranking.

Field	Aikido AI AutoFix	Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents)
Vendor	Aikido Security	Legit Security (Legit Security Ltd)
HQ	Belgium · Europe	Israel · Middle East
Primary category	Code security	Code security
Also listed in	Code security, Security	Code security, Security
Summary	Aikido AutoFix turns SAST, SCA, IaC, container, pentest and AI code-audit findings into reviewable pull requests or IDE patches. Vendor is Belgium-founded with a Ghent European HQ.	Remediation agents in Legit's Agentic AppSec platform that prioritise SAST and SCA findings using reachability, exploitability and business context, write root-cause fixes (including dependency upgrades), re-scan to validate them and open pull requests across every affected repository for developers to review.
Frameworks (vendor-stated)	—	—
Frameworks (vendor-claimed)	—	—
Capabilities / tasks	appsec, remediation, sast, vulnerability management, iac	appsec, remediation, sast, sca, vulnerability management
Integrations (vendor-listed)	Not recorded in this dataset yet	GitHub / SCM pull requests, third-party AppSec scanners (ingested findings)
Pricing (as published)	Published plans on aikido.dev/pricing include a free option and paid team plans (Basic listed at $300/month for 10 users on the pricing page at last check). Confirm current amounts on the vendor pricing page.	Not published; demo-led (Legit Security site, checked 2026-10-29).
Pricing model	freemium	quote
Primary source	https://www.aikido.dev/code/autofix	https://www.legitsecurity.com/platform/agentic-remediation
Last checked	2026-10-18	2026-10-29
Official site	https://www.aikido.dev/code/autofix	https://www.legitsecurity.com/platform/agentic-remediation

FAQ (from this dataset)

What is the difference between Aikido AI AutoFix and Legit Security Agentic Remediation?

Both are listed under Code security. Shared tasks: appsec, remediation, sast, vulnerability-management. Aikido AI AutoFix-only tasks: iac. Legit Security Agentic Remediation-only tasks: sca. Differences are from stored category and task tags, not a ranking.

Which one publishes pricing?

Aikido AI AutoFix: Published plans on aikido.dev/pricing include a free option and paid team plans (Basic listed at $300/month for 10 users on the pricing page at last check). Confirm current amounts on the vendor pricing page. Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents): Not published; demo-led (Legit Security site, checked 2026-10-29).

Where are Aikido AI AutoFix and Legit Security Agentic Remediation headquartered?

Aikido AI AutoFix publishes HQ in Belgium. Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents) publishes HQ in Israel.

Side-by-side data is generated from the open dataset. “Vendor-claimed” frameworks are as marketed by each vendor and not verified by Agent Index; framework tags indicate relevance, not certification. Request current quotes from each vendor before buying. This page does not rank or score vendors. Sponsored comparisons, if any, will be labelled.

Also in this use case

Other verified listings that share a task tag or use-case group with Aikido AI AutoFix or Legit Security Agentic Remediation (SAST and SCA remediation agents). Open a pair page or the use-case table — this is not a ranking.

Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) — German AppSec product from Düsseldorf: a team of agents audits repositories (SAST, secrets, SCA, IaC, CI/CD) and cloud accounts, triages signals so only confirmed findings surface, pentests running apps inside a verified scope with a separate agent reproducing every finding, reviews pull requests with a merge-blocking status check, and opens fix pull requests that run your tests but never merge themselves. · Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) pair comparison
Covasant TPRM (agentic third-party risk management) — Third-party risk product from Hyderabad-headquartered Covasant. Purpose-built AI agents onboard vendors through due-diligence workflows, chase vendors who are slow to respond, keep watching news, sanctions and financial data, and, when risk thresholds break, open remediation workflows, track vendor responses, escalate unresolved issues and produce DORA, SOX and NIST reporting packages.
noze CyberAgent (AI agent for continuous attack-surface monitoring, automated validation pentesting and NIS2 evidence) — Italian agent for mid-sized companies and NIS2 entities without an in-house SOC: after verifying domain control it continuously discovers assets and assesses network, web apps and APIs, correlates findings with EPSS and CISA KEV, confirms exploitability with automated validation pentests, ranks risks by business impact and prepares NIS2, DORA and ISO 27001 reports; the team decides what to fix.

Use-case comparisons

AI code security agents — 37 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)