Cobalt alternative

Fencer vs Cobalt

An AI penetration testing comparison for lean software teams
Quick answer

Fencer and Cobalt take different shapes. Cobalt is a pentest-as-a-service built on a community of human pentesters, now adding AI, and even its new autonomous pentest keeps a human pentester authorizing the engagement. Fencer is a fully autonomous product: it proves exploits and applies the fix (pull requests for code, cloud corrections) with no human in the loop during the test, at published self-serve pricing. Cobalt is the right answer when you need a named human expert to stand behind the report; Fencer is the right answer for a lean software team that wants continuous, on-demand testing that also fixes what it finds.

Fencer is best for

Lean software teams that want continuous, on-demand, autonomous testing that also fixes what it finds, at published self-serve pricing.

Cobalt is best for

Teams that need a named, vetted human expert to stand behind the pen test report for compliance or the board.

Testing model: a product you run, or a service you schedule?

The biggest difference is shape. One is software you run whenever you want; the other is a scheduled engagement delivered by people.

Fencer
  • A product you run on demand or continuously, with no scheduling
  • Fully autonomous, no human in the loop during the test
Cobalt
  • A scheduled service delivered by vetted human pentesters
  • Even its autonomous pentest keeps a human pentester authorizing the run

Vulnerability remediation: does it fix, or report?

After the findings arrive, a tool either applies the fix or leaves remediation to your team.

Fencer
  • Applies the fix: pull requests for code, cloud misconfigurations corrected via the provider API, then re-tests
Cobalt
  • Reports findings and integrates them into Jira and GitHub; remediation stays your team’s work

Speed and availability: on-demand, or wait for a slot?

How fast you can test decides how well coverage keeps pace with deploys. A human service depends on scheduling and tester availability.

Fencer
  • Run a test any time, with no scheduling or tester-availability wait
Cobalt
  • Engagements start within about 24 hours to a few business days, with tester assignment

Human sign-off and compliance: whose name is on the report?

For some audits and buyers, a named human expert who stands behind the result is a requirement; this is a genuine Cobalt strength.

Fencer
  • Autonomous testing with a PDF report; a human-led pen test is available for cases that require a named human
Cobalt
  • A vetted human expert stands behind every engagement, which many auditors and compliance buyers want

Pricing: published pricing or credits and quotes?

Whether pricing is published, and how predictable it is, tells a lean team whether it can budget without a sales cycle.

Fencer
  • Published pricing: the AI-led pen test is $3,000 one-time or included on the platform plans
Cobalt
  • Credit-based, mostly quoted, with budgeting that reviewers describe as hard to predict

Fencer vs Cobalt: feature comparison

CriterionFencerCobalt
ModelA product you runA human-led service you schedule
AutonomyFully autonomous, no human gateHuman-led; the autonomous option still needs a human to authorize
Fixes the vulnerabilitiesApplies fixes: pull requests and cloud correctionsReports and integrates findings; your team fixes
Speed to startOn-demand, any timeAbout 24 hours to a few business days
Human sign-offOptional human-led pen test availableA vetted human expert on every engagement
PricingPublished, $3,000 or included on platform plansCredit-based, mostly quoted
Built forLean software teamsTeams needing human-signed pentests

Pros and cons of Fencer

Pros

  • Fully autonomous, no human authorization gate
  • Applies fixes rather than reporting them
  • On-demand and continuous, with no scheduling
  • Published self-serve pricing
  • A human-led pen test is available when a named human is required

Cons

  • Autonomous by default, where some buyers want a named human on every test
  • No crowdsourced human red-teaming community
  • A newer brand with fewer public reviews

Pros and cons of Cobalt

Pros

  • Vetted human experts and business-logic depth
  • A named human sign-off that auditors trust
  • An established brand and a large review base
  • Broad engagement types, including red teaming

Cons

  • Even its autonomous pentest keeps a human authorization gate
  • Reports findings but does not apply fixes
  • Scheduled, with tester assignment and coordination overhead
  • Credit-based, mostly quoted pricing

When Fencer is the better fit

Fencer is the better fit for a lean software team that wants continuous, on-demand, autonomous testing that also fixes what it finds, at a published price, without scheduling a human engagement.

When Cobalt is the better fit

Cobalt is the better fit for a team that specifically needs a named, vetted human expert to stand behind the pen test report for compliance or board assurance.

Where Fencer fits

Fencer runs autonomous AI penetration tests that prove what is actually exploitable, then fix what they find, opening pull requests for code and correcting cloud misconfigurations through the provider API, and re-testing to confirm. The pen test lives in the same platform that scans and secures the rest of your stack, at published pricing, built to run without a dedicated security engineer.

Frequently asked questions

No items found.

Take Fencer for a spin

See what security handled from code to cloud looks like.
Start a free trial in minutes, or book a demo for a guided tour.