llmthreat
For vendors 21 vendors · 10 tools Matrix Vendors

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

Vijil and Akto are both Agentic AI Security vendors. Vijil covers 5 of 10 OWASP LLM risks and Akto covers 3, as of 2026-07-13. Based on llmthreat's coverage scoring, Vijil 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

AttributeVijilAkto
CategoryAgentic AI SecurityAgentic AI Security
DeploymentSaaS and on-premise; agents run in confidential-computing/trusted execution environmentSaaS and self-hosted (plug-n-play), runtime monitoring
Best forTeams building and operating AI agents that need context-specific red teaming plus low-latency runtime guardrails and hardened base models across the agent stack (LLM, tools, MCP, delegated agents)Teams that already need API security and want unified discovery plus testing of AI agents, MCP servers and LLM endpoints
Founded20232022
Funding$23M$4.5M
StatusActiveActive

OWASP LLM Top 10 coverage: Vijil 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 RiskVijilAkto
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 Partial Not covered
LLM08 Vector and Embedding Weaknesses Not covered Not covered
LLM09 Misinformation Covered Partial
LLM10 Unbounded Consumption Covered Partial

Where they differ

Vijil addresses LLM05 Improper Output Handling, LLM07 System Prompt Leakage — 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?

Vijil edges it on breadth, 5 covered risks to 3. Vijil is built for teams building and operating AI agents that need context-specific red teaming plus low-latency runtime guardrails and hardened base models across the agent stack (LLM, tools, MCP, delegated agents), 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: Vijil and Akto.

Frequently asked questions

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

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

Are Vijil and Akto independent?

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

Last verified . Sources: https://vijil.ai/, 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.