Cursor Bugbot vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)
Quick answer
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix) (ZeroPath) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index.
They share no framework tags in our dataset.
This is not a ranking.
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix) (ZeroPath) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset.
| Field |  Cursor Bugbot | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Anysphere | ZeroPath |
| HQ | United States · North America | United States · North America |
| Primary category | Code security | Code security |
| Also listed in | Code security, Security | Code security, Security |
| Summary | Cursor’s AI pull-request reviewer. Official docs say it identifies bugs, security issues and code-quality problems and comments with explanations and suggested fixes. | AI-native AppSec platform that finds business-logic and auth flaws, validates findings from existing SAST tools, runs PR security reviews and generates one-click patches refined in natural language. |
| Frameworks (vendor-stated) | — | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | — |
| Capabilities / tasks | pr review, appsec, remediation | appsec, sast, remediation, pr review, sca |
| Pricing (as published) | Usage-based on Individual and Teams plans; no separate Bugbot subscription. Cursor’s Bugbot page states Individual plans use included usage first, Teams bill from on-demand usage, and the average review costs $1.00–$1.50 depending on PR size. Enterprise trials are arranged with the account team. | Team plan starting from $1,000/month + $60 per developer (unlimited repositories and scans) on zeropath.com/pricing; Enterprise is custom; usage-based credits listed as coming soon; startup discounts up to 50%. |
| Pricing model | published-tiers | published-tiers |
| Primary source | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://zeropath.com/products/sast-autofix |
| Last checked | 2026-10-18 | 2026-10-18 |
| Official site | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://zeropath.com/products/sast-autofix |
FAQ (from this dataset)
What is the difference between Cursor Bugbot and ZeroPath?
Both are listed under Code security. Shared tasks: pr-review, appsec, remediation. Cursor Bugbot-only tasks: none. ZeroPath-only tasks: sast, sca. Differences are from stored category and task tags, not a ranking.
Which one publishes pricing?
Cursor Bugbot: Usage-based on Individual and Teams plans; no separate Bugbot subscription. Cursor’s Bugbot page states Individual plans use included usage first, Teams bill from on-demand usage, and the average review costs $1.00–$1.50 depending on PR size. Enterprise trials are arranged with the account team. ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix): Team plan starting from $1,000/month + $60 per developer (unlimited repositories and scans) on zeropath.com/pricing; Enterprise is custom; usage-based credits listed as coming soon; startup discounts up to 50%.
Where are Cursor Bugbot and ZeroPath headquartered?
Cursor Bugbot publishes HQ in United States. ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix) publishes HQ in United States.
Also in this use case
Other verified listings that share a task tag or use-case group with Cursor Bugbot or ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix). 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.
Use-case comparisons
- AI code security agents — 33 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)
Related
- Cursor Bugbot alternatives
- ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix) alternatives
- Best code security AI agents
More Cursor Bugbot comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Cursor Bugbot
- AISLE (autonomous vulnerability discovery, triage and verified-fix agents) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Cursor Bugbot
More ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix) comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)
- AISLE (autonomous vulnerability discovery, triage and verified-fix agents) vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)
- Amnify security agents (agent-driven code audit, AI pentesting, PR review and autofix pull requests) vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs ZeroPath (AI-native SAST and autofix)