Conveyor vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)
Quick answer
Conveyor (Conveyor) and Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) (Horizon3.ai) are both listed in the Security category of Agent Index.
They share no framework tags in our dataset.
This is not a ranking.
Conveyor (Conveyor) and Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) (Horizon3.ai) are both listed in the Security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset. Only Conveyor is tagged for SOC 2, ISO 27001.
| Field |  Conveyor |  Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Conveyor | Horizon3.ai |
| HQ | United States · North America | United States · North America |
| Primary category | Security | Security |
| Also listed in | Security, Compliance, Business operations | Security |
| Summary | Customer trust platform with ConveyorAI for answering security questionnaires and sharing trust center content. | Autonomous pentesting platform that runs unlimited self-directed internal, external, cloud, Kubernetes and AD pentests, plans attack paths, guides remediation and re-tests to verify fixes. |
| Frameworks (vendor-stated) | SOC 2, ISO 27001 | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | FedRAMP |
| Capabilities / tasks | questionnaire automation, trust center | pen test management, attack surface, exposure management, vulnerability management |
| Pricing (as published) | Published outcome-based pricing on conveyor.com/pricing. | Not published |
| Pricing model | published-tiers | quote |
| Primary source | https://www.conveyor.com/pricing | https://horizon3.ai/nodezero/ |
| Last checked | 2026-10-15 | 2026-10-18 |
| Official site | https://www.conveyor.com/ | https://horizon3.ai/nodezero/ |
FAQ (from this dataset)
What is the difference between Conveyor and Horizon3.ai NodeZero?
Both are listed under Security. They share no task tags in this dataset. Conveyor-only tasks: questionnaire-automation, trust-center. Horizon3.ai NodeZero-only tasks: pen-test-management, attack-surface, exposure-management, vulnerability-management. Differences are from stored category and task tags, not a ranking.
Which one publishes pricing?
Conveyor: Published outcome-based pricing on conveyor.com/pricing. Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting): Not published
Where are Conveyor and Horizon3.ai NodeZero headquartered?
Conveyor publishes HQ in United States. Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) publishes HQ in United States.
Also in this use case
Other verified listings that share a task tag or use-case group with Conveyor or Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting). 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.
- 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. · noze CyberAgent (AI agent for continuous attack-surface monitoring, automated validation pentesting and NIS2 evidence) pair comparison
- trail Governance Agents (GRC and AI governance agents) — Munich-based trail's Governance Agents run GRC busywork in the background: they read your project files and sources to collect and link evidence, assess controls, classify systems, run risk and vendor assessments and draft policies, proposing changes that a human approves before anything is written.
Use-case comparisons
- Agentic pentesting AI agents — 33 listings (Autonomous or AI-assisted penetration testing, attack-surface testing and exploitable-path verification)
- Security questionnaire AI agents — 10 listings (Inbound security questionnaires, SIG/CAIQ-style responses and questionnaire automation)
Related
- Conveyor alternatives
- Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) alternatives
- Best security AI agents
More Conveyor comparisons
- Conveyor vs SafeBase
- Andesite Human-AI SOC (Azimuth for Government) vs Conveyor
- Conveyor vs Hadrian Nova (agentic pentesting)
- Conveyor vs Mondoo
- Conveyor vs Orca Security
More Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting) comparisons
- 7AI agentic security platform vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)
- Abnormal AI Security Mailbox (Abnormal AI for Government) vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)
- Adaptive Security Agentic Email Security and Phish Triage vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)
- Aikido Attack AI Pentesting vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)
- AIpentix (agentic continuous security testing and agentic red teaming, by Swipergy) vs Horizon3.ai NodeZero (autonomous pentesting)