llmthreat
For vendors 21 vendors · 10 tools Matrix Vendors

Straiker vs Akto: Which One Covers More of the OWASP LLM Top 10 in 2026?

Straiker and Akto are both Agentic AI Security vendors. Straiker covers 5 of 10 OWASP LLM risks and Akto covers 3, as of 2026-07-13. Based on llmthreat's coverage scoring, Straiker covers more of the OWASP LLM Top 10 (5 vs 3). The full row-by-row diff is below.

Sponsored Comparison — this slot is available to category sponsors. Paid placement does not alter the coverage data or verdict below.

Spec comparison

AttributeStraikerAkto
CategoryAgentic AI SecurityAgentic AI Security
DeploymentSaaS; inline runtime protection plus API/agent integrationSaaS and self-hosted (plug-n-play), runtime monitoring
Best forEnterprises deploying autonomous AI agents and MCP servers that need agent discovery, adversarial testing and runtime blockingTeams that already need API security and want unified discovery plus testing of AI agents, MCP servers and LLM endpoints
Founded20242022
Funding$85M$4.5M
StatusActiveActive

OWASP LLM Top 10 coverage: Straiker vs Akto

This diff is llmthreat's editorial read of both vendors' public documentation as of 2026-07-13, not an audited or vendor-endorsed score.

OWASP LLM Top 10 (2025) coverage diff — as of 2026-07-13
OWASP LLM RiskStraikerAkto
LLM01 Prompt Injection Covered Covered
LLM02 Sensitive Information Disclosure Covered Covered
LLM03 Supply Chain Partial Partial
LLM04 Data and Model Poisoning Partial Partial
LLM05 Improper Output Handling Partial Not covered
LLM06 Excessive Agency Covered Covered
LLM07 System Prompt Leakage Covered Not covered
LLM08 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses Partial Not covered
LLM09 Misinformation Covered Partial
LLM10 Unbounded Consumption Partial Partial

Where they differ

Straiker addresses LLM05 Improper Output Handling, LLM07 System Prompt Leakage, LLM08 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses — risks where Akto scores Not covered or Unverified.

On the rest, they overlap. Past those gaps the decision is depth per risk, deployment, and price, not breadth.

Which should you choose?

Straiker edges it on breadth, 5 covered risks to 3. Straiker is built for enterprises deploying autonomous AI agents and MCP servers that need agent discovery, adversarial testing and runtime blocking, while Akto suits teams that already need API security and want unified discovery plus testing of AI agents, MCP servers and LLM endpoints. Both rows sit in the full coverage matrix — read the profiles before deciding: Straiker and Akto.

Frequently asked questions

Does Straiker or Akto cover more of the OWASP LLM Top 10?

Straiker does, 5 risks to 3 by our scoring. The diff table above shows exactly where they part ways.

Are Straiker and Akto independent?

Straiker is independent; Akto is independent, as of 2026-07-13.

Last verified . Sources: https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/straiker-raises-64m-series-a-to-secure-the-agentic-workforce-302812638.html, https://www.akto.io/agentic-security, OWASP LLM Top 10 (2025). Funding and repo figures are third-party and go stale. Re-verify before you rely on them.
Informational, not professional security advice — verify both vendors' claims against OWASP, MITRE, and the vendors directly before a decision. OWASP, MITRE, and the listed vendors and maintainers do not endorse llmthreat.com.