Skip to content
effecthub

Corgea vs Pixee

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors.

The short answer

Free plan
Corgea has one; Pixee prices on request
Public API
Both have one
Best fit
Corgea: Engineering teams that want AI-written fixes attached to security findings · Pixee: Security teams sitting on a large scanner backlog they cannot triage by hand
Platforms
Corgea: Web, VS Code extension · Pixee: Web
Trust score
About even — Corgea 89, Pixee 87

From our own records as of each tool's last check. Anything we have not confirmed is left out rather than guessed. How we verify

CorgeaAI-native application security platform that scans code, finds logic and auth flaws, and writes fixes developers can apply.PixeeTriages SAST and SCA findings, drops the false positives and opens pull requests with the fix

Side by side

FactCorgeaPixee
CategoryVulnerability Scanning & PentestingVulnerability Scanning & Pentesting
Pricing modelFreemiumContact
Starts at$39/seat/mo—
Public APIYesYes
Trust score89 / 10087 / 100
PlatformsWeb, API, VS Code extensionWeb, API
CompanyCorgeaPixee Inc.
Launched2023—
Last verifiedOct 2, 2026Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

Corgea

A developer-oriented AppSec platform whose pitch is that findings come with fixes rather than just alerts. The free plan and public per-seat prices make it easy to evaluate with a real repository. Procurement-heavy teams should plan for the 5-seat and 20-seat minimums on the paid tiers.

Pros

  • Free tier covers AI SAST, dependency, container, IaC and secrets scanning
  • Public per-developer prices
  • Autofix suggestions across pull requests, IDE and ticketing tools
  • SOC 2 Type II controls stated for handling customer code

Cons

  • Free plan limited to two people and ten repositories
  • Paid tiers carry seat minimums
  • Accuracy figures such as fewer false positives are vendor claims

Pixee

Pixee attacks the part of AppSec that stayed manual - triage and fixing - and charges on findings volume rather than seats, so onboarding more developers does not raise the bill. Being built by the people who ran Contrast Security shows in the workflow design. The friction is commercial: no published price, no free tier, no self-serve way to try it on your own repository.

Pros

  • Charges on findings volume, so adding developers does not raise the bill
  • Delivers fixes as reviewable pull requests, not as advisory tickets
  • Filters exploitable findings out of scanner output instead of forwarding the whole backlog
  • Design-time review catches issues before the code exists, not only after

Cons

  • No published price at all - every engagement starts with a sales call
  • No free tier or self-serve trial to test against your own repository
  • Depends on you already owning SAST and SCA scanners
  • The company publishes no founding year or headcount

Which one fits

Choose Corgea if you need

  • Engineering teams that want AI-written fixes attached to security findings
  • Startups needing SAST, secrets and dependency scanning in one tool
  • Security teams automating pull-request scanning across many repositories

Choose Pixee if you need

  • Security teams sitting on a large scanner backlog they cannot triage by hand
  • Enterprises shipping AI-generated code faster than AppSec can review it
  • Organisations that already own SAST and SCA tooling and need the resolution half

Corgea vs Pixee: the questions people ask

Is Corgea cheaper than Pixee?

Corgea starts at $39/seat/mo; Pixee prices on request, so a quote is the only way to compare.

Does Corgea or Pixee have a free tier?

Corgea has a free tier; Pixee prices on request.

Which has a public API, Corgea or Pixee?

Both ship a public API, so either can be built on; the fact table above shows the platforms each one runs on.

More comparisons

Browse all Vulnerability Scanning & Pentesting →