Agentic Index
depthfirst vs Pi (2026)
Both find and fix software vulnerabilities autonomously and depthfirst documents considerably more, 11 of 14 against 7. depthfirst detects, triages and remediates software vulnerabilities, priced by codebase size, developer count and modules. That verdict is the Agentic Index coverage score, graded from each vendor's own published materials.
Pi builds a security brain of your code, cloud and history, then autonomously finds and ships fixes across the software development lifecycle. The historical context Pi builds is the interesting differentiator: a vulnerability that keeps returning is a different problem from one that appeared yesterday, and most tools cannot tell them apart.
On the Agentic Index AI SOC ranking, depthfirst clears the bar and Pi does not. depthfirst documents all five investigation loop capabilities in full; Pi documents two of the five in full. 24 of the 94 vendors in the lane clear it. See the AI SOC ranking
This comparison is published by Agentic Index, an independent agentic AI vendor research platform. depthfirst and Pi are each graded against the same 14 capability Agentic Index taxonomy, from the vendor's own public materials under the Agentic Index verification standard, alongside 969 researched vendors. No vendor pays for placement and no vendor has reviewed this page. How this evidence is graded
Choose depthfirst if
- Documented coverage is materially broader and it will show across a large codebase.
- Triage is the bottleneck: you already have findings and cannot work through them.
- Pricing scaled to codebase and team size maps to how you would justify this.
Choose Pi if
- Recurring vulnerabilities are your pattern, and history is what explains them.
- Cloud context alongside code is required because your risk spans both.
- Shipping fixes across the whole lifecycle, not only flagging them, is the outcome.
| At a glance | depthfirst | Pi |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Security / SOC agent | Security / SOC agent |
| Entry price | Not public; enterprise sales, scoped to codebase size, developer count, and modules | Not public; quoted through enterprise sales, scaled to codebase and development environment |
| Free / trial | Demo available on request; no public self serve tier | No public free tier |
| Pricing confidence | contact only | contact only |
| Feature | d depthfirst |
P Pi |
|---|---|---|
| Action & orchestration | ||
|
Integrations & Tool Calling Ability to connect agents to real systems through native integrations, OAuth-authenticated actions, custom tools, APIs, webhooks, or MCP-compatible tools. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Workflow Orchestration Ability to sequence, branch, retry, route, and combine deterministic workflow nodes with autonomous agent steps. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Triggers & Channel Coverage How agents wake up and where they work: schedules, webhooks, message events, CRM events, inbox events, chat, email, voice, and collaboration tools. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Knowledge & context | ||
|
Knowledge Grounding & RAG Ability to ground agent behavior in company data through document ingestion, retrieval, external knowledge APIs, semantic search, or RAG layers. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
|
Memory & State Persistence Ability to persist context across a run, conversation, workflow, user, team, or longer-term memory layer. |
Full / Explicit | Full / Explicit |
| Control & trust | ||
|
Human Oversight & Guardrails Approval steps, consent checkpoints, escalation rules, structured guardrails, policy constraints, and pause/resume controls. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
|
Security, Identity & Governance RBAC, SSO, auditability, encryption, least-privilege tool access, compliance posture, and data handling policy. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
|
Observability & Auditability Traces, logs, execution histories, metrics, audit events, and debugging detail for production agent behavior. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
|
Deployment & Data Residency Deployment modes and options, including SaaS, dedicated cloud, VPC, on-prem, hybrid, local runtime, and self-hosting. |
Partial | No / Not documented |
| Solution readiness | ||
|
Prebuilt Agents, Templates & Packs Ready-made workflows, packaged employees, templates, blueprints, industry solutions, and role-specific agents that reduce time-to-value. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Platform extensibility | ||
|
Model Flexibility & Routing Ability to work across multiple foundation models, route tasks to different models, or let buyers bring their own providers and keys. |
No / Not documented | No / Not documented |
|
APIs, SDKs & MCP Extensibility Composability layer: stable APIs, SDKs, MCP tool consumption/serving, custom tools, and integration into internal systems. |
Partial | No / Not documented |
|
Testing, Debugging & Optimization Testing, debugging, scoring, retries, fallbacks, quality gates, and optimization loops for improving agent workflows before and after deployment. |
Full / Explicit | Partial |
| Specialist automation | ||
|
Browser & Computer Use Browser, desktop, or remote/local computer control for workflows that cannot be handled through stable APIs alone. |
No / Not documented | No / Not documented |
Pricing snapshot
Sourced from the Index pricing dataset · open each vendor's profile for full detail.
| Pricing | d depthfirst |
P Pi |
|---|---|---|
|
Entry price Lowest public entry point |
Not public; enterprise sales, scoped to codebase size, developer count, and modules | Not public; quoted through enterprise sales, scaled to codebase and development environment |
|
Pricing confidence How public the numbers are |
Contact only | Contact only |
|
Billing Primary billing axis |
codebase size, developers, and modules | enterprise subscription scaled to codebase and development environment |
|
Variable cost Workload / overage exposure |
Medium variable cost | Medium variable cost |
|
Free tier / trial Try before you buy |
No free tierTrial
|
No free tier
|
|
Buying motion Self-serve vs sales call |
Sales call | Sales call |
Other matchups in security and SOC agents
Not the pairing you were after? These compare a different set of security and SOC agents on the same 14 capabilities.