compare
Xalgorix vs PentestGPT
PentestGPT and Xalgorix are both open-source AI pentesting agents, built for different jobs. PentestGPT grew out of academic research and shines at CTF-style challenges across many categories. Xalgorix is built for testing real web apps and APIs, with exploit-verified findings and reports a team can act on.
Published by Xalgorix. Verified on 19 October 2026 against the PentestGPT README, and Xalgorix pricing. Spotted something out of date? Tell us.
At a glance
| Xalgorix | PentestGPT | |
|---|---|---|
| Open-source license | Apache-2.0 | MIT |
| GitHub stars (19 Oct 2026) | ~1.2k | ~16k |
| Focus | Web applications and APIs, through a 22-phase methodology | CTFs and pentests across web, crypto, reversing, forensics, pwn and privilege escalation |
| How it runs | Its own agent with your LLM provider key (or local models via Ollama), or hosted on Xalgorix Cloud | Drives the Claude Code or Codex CLI; an interactive legacy mode supports more providers, including local Ollama |
| Findings | Reported only after a working exploit, then re-tested by an independent verifier; PDF and HTML reports | Multi-stage pipeline: asset discovery, vulnerability identification and a report in pentest mode; a live walkthrough in CTF mode |
| Hosted option | Xalgorix Cloud: 10 credits for $10 (never expire); plans from $49/mo | None listed in the README |
| Research | Methodology and verification design documented on xalgorix.com | Published at USENIX Security 2024 |
Choose Xalgorix when
- You're testing a real web app or API and need findings proven before anyone triages them.
- You want a hosted option with no model keys, plus reports you can share.
- You want free security reviews on pull requests and CI gating on verified findings.
- You need to run it against staging or production with non-destructive payloads.
Choose PentestGPT when
- You're solving CTF challenges, including crypto, reversing, forensics and pwn.
- You want to drive the agent with an existing Claude Code or Codex subscription.
- You want a tool with a peer-reviewed research paper behind it.
- You prefer the MIT license.
Questions
- Can I use both?
- Yes. They're both open source. Many people learn and practice with CTF tooling and use a dedicated web-app scanner for authorized testing of their own applications.
- Which one finds more bugs?
- They target different problems, and we haven't published a head-to-head benchmark. We won't claim one until we can run a reproducible comparison.
See the evidence on your own app
10 credits for $10, no subscription, and credits never expire. Or run the open-source engine yourself.