Comparison
LyraShield AI vs Aikido
How LyraShield AI compares to Aikido for developer-centric CI/CD security. Approach, evidence states, coverage framework, and deployment model differences.
Last reviewed:
Factual comparison. [Aikido Security](https://www.aikido.dev/) is a unified security platform covering code, cloud, and runtime from one interface — SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC/container scanning, CSPM, DAST, AI pentesting, and runtime protection — with auto-generated fix PRs. [LyraShield AI](https://lyrashieldai.com/) is release assurance for AI-built apps: a target → review → evidence → fix → retest → report loop with evidence states, immutable assurance reports, and approval-gated fixes. Aikido is a broad AppSec platform with a pentest layer; LyraShield AI is a focused release-assurance loop purpose-built for AI-generated code. Neither replaces the other.
Core approach
| Aspect | LyraShield AI | Aikido |
|---|---|---|
| Primary focus | Evidence-backed release assurance for AI-built apps | Unified AppSec platform: code, cloud, runtime in one system |
| Scanning approach | Agentic engine with coverage framework and evidence states; AI-pattern focus | Multi-engine (SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, containers, CSPM, DAST) + AI pentest agents |
| Finding lifecycle | Detected → independently verified → retest-confirmed or inconclusive | Open → triaged (AutoT deprioritizes non-risk) → AutoFix PR or ticket |
| Control framework | Vibe Security 50 (43 code/URL review + 7 evidence-required) | No published control framework; rule engine + context-based prioritization |
| AI-generated code focus | Built for AI-built apps; scans agent rules, MCP configs, AI patterns | AI Code Quality review + malware detection; not AI-code-specific assurance |
| Fix model | Approval-gated: PR blocked until server-generated patch bound to exact approval | AutoFix generates reviewable PRs across code, deps, IaC, containers |
Capability comparison
| Capability | LyraShield AI | Aikido |
|---|---|---|
| Static analysis (SAST) | Agentic | Yes (pattern + context) |
| SCA (dependency scanning) | Yes (engine) | Yes (with malware detection) |
| Secret scanning | Yes (engine + GitHub Action) | Yes |
| IaC / container scanning | Not a primary focus | Yes |
| Cloud posture (CSPM) | Not a primary focus | Yes |
| DAST / surface monitoring | Via agentic pentest | Yes (surface monitoring) |
| AI / agentic pentest | Yes | Yes (200+ agents; continuous autonomous pentesting) |
| Evidence states (4-state lifecycle) | Yes | No (AutoT prioritization instead) |
| Deterministic retest | Yes | Re-test after fix (continuous testing) |
| Coverage receipts | Yes (per-control) | No |
| Assurance reports (immutable) | Yes | Audit-grade pentest reports |
| MCP server integration | Yes (inside AI coding agents) | Not advertised |
| Approval-gated fix execution | Yes (PR blocked until patch bound to approval) | AutoFix PRs (reviewable, not approval-gated execution) |
| Runtime protection | Not in v1 | Yes (in-app firewall, bot/device protection) |
Deployment and pricing
| Aspect | LyraShield AI | Aikido |
|---|---|---|
| Deployment | Hosted + CLI + MCP + GitHub Action | SaaS + IDE + CI integrations; broker for internal apps; local code scanning option |
| Pricing | Open beta; pricing announced as it matures | Free (forever, no card); $300/mo small teams; $600/mo growing teams; Enterprise custom. Pentest: typical from $4,000; rightsized $50–$30,000+; continuous testing custom |
| Compliance posture | Assurance-record orientation for release sign-off | SOC 2 Type II + ISO 27001:2022 attested |
When to use which
Use LyraShield AI when
- Your app is AI-built and you need AI-specific pattern coverage and an assurance record for the release
- You need immutable assurance reports with coverage receipts for compliance or client handoff
- You want fixes approval-gated so a PR cannot execute until a server-generated patch is bound to an exact approval
- You want security checks inside your AI coding agent via MCP
- You want a focused release-assurance loop, not a broad AppSec stack
Use Aikido when
- You want one platform spanning code, cloud, and runtime (SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, containers, CSPM, DAST, runtime)
- You want auto-generated fix PRs across code, dependencies, IaC, and containers
- You need runtime protection (in-app firewall, bot/device protection) alongside scanning
- You want a transparent, published pricing ladder with a free tier
- You want a rightsized or continuous AI pentest bolted onto a broader AppSec platform
Aikido is the broad AppSec platform; LyraShield AI is the release-assurance loop for AI-built apps. Read our comparison methodology and try the free browser-local tools at lyrashieldai.com.
Methodology and scope
Every claim on this page is drawn from publicly documented capabilities at the date above. Read how LyraShield tests, records evidence, and reports coverage for the assurance model behind the comparison, and treat anything not stated there as out of scope.
For the long-form version of this comparison, including the evidence model and where each tool fits a release gate, read LyraShield AI vs Aikido.
Frequently asked questions
- Does LyraShield replace Aikido?
- No. Aikido is a unified code to cloud to runtime platform covering SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, containers, CSPM, DAST, AI pentesting, and runtime protection, with AutoFix PRs and a free forever tier. LyraShield in open beta is not a broad AppSec stack; it is a focused loop for AI-built apps with approval-gated fixes and immutable assurance.
- Can I use Aikido and LyraShield together?
- Yes. Use Aikido for broad, continuous scanning and runtime protection across your estate, and add LyraShield for the release assurance run before you ship AI-built apps. Both support GitHub integrations, so findings can coexist. Aikido offers transparent pricing from $300 per month for small teams; LyraShield pricing will be announced as it matures.
- When should I choose Aikido over LyraShield?
- Choose Aikido when you want one platform for code, cloud, and runtime, with auto-generated fix PRs, malware detection in dependencies, and published pricing including a free tier. Its 200+ AI agents for continuous pentesting are a genuine strength for coverage. Choose LyraShield when you need explicit approval gates and immutable evidence for release decisions.
- How do their fix models differ?
- Aikido AutoFix generates reviewable fix PRs across code, dependencies, IaC, and containers that go through normal developer review. LyraShield approval-gated fixes block PR execution until a server-generated patch is bound to an exact approval, then require a deterministic retest before close. LyraShield is intentionally stricter for AI-generated code.