Cursor Bugbot vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
Cursor Bugbot (Anysphere) and StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) (StackHawk (StackHawk, Inc.)) are both listed in the Code security category of Agent Index. They share no framework tags in our dataset.
| Field |  Cursor Bugbot |  StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Anysphere | StackHawk (StackHawk, Inc.) |
| HQ | United States · North America | United States · North America |
| Primary category | Code security | Code security |
| Also listed in | Code security, Security | Code security, Security |
| Summary | Cursor’s AI pull-request reviewer. Official docs say it identifies bugs, security issues and code-quality problems and comments with explanations and suggested fixes. | Security plugin for AI coding agents (Claude Code, Cursor, GitHub Copilot, Codex, Antigravity) that runs dynamic tests against the running app during the coding session, has the agent triage and fix what it finds, then rescans to prove the fix before the pull request. Published at US$10 per user per month. |
| Framework tags (Agent Index) | — | — |
| Frameworks (vendor-claimed) | — | — |
| Capabilities / tasks | pr review, appsec, remediation | appsec, remediation, vulnerability management, agent platform with security integrations |
| Pricing (as published) | Usage-based on Individual and Teams plans; no separate Bugbot subscription. Cursor’s Bugbot page states Individual plans use included usage first, Teams bill from on-demand usage, and the average review costs $1.00–$1.50 depending on PR size. Enterprise trials are arranged with the account team. | Wingman: US$10 per user per month, unlimited apps, 14-day free trial (no card). Scale plan: contact sales. |
| Pricing model | published-tiers | published-tiers |
| Primary source | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://www.stackhawk.com/product/wingman/ |
| Last checked | 2026-10-18 | 2026-10-18 |
| Official site | https://cursor.com/docs/bugbot | https://www.stackhawk.com/product/wingman/ |
Listings tagged agent platform with security integrations are coding platforms with a documented scanner or vulnerability-fix workflow, not dedicated application-security products. Dedicated AppSec listings are compared on the AI code security agents table.
Side-by-side data is generated from the open dataset. “Vendor-claimed” frameworks are as marketed by each vendor and not verified by Agent Index; framework tags indicate relevance, not certification. Request current quotes from each vendor before buying. This page does not rank or score vendors. Sponsored comparisons, if any, will be labelled.
Use-case comparisons
- AI code security agents — 25 listings (Application security scanning, suggested or automated code fixes, and pull-request security review)
Related
- Cursor Bugbot alternatives
- StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) alternatives
- Best code security AI agents
More Cursor Bugbot comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs Cursor Bugbot
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs Cursor Bugbot
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs Cursor Bugbot
- Checkmarx One Assist vs Cursor Bugbot
- Claude Code security review vs Cursor Bugbot
More StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents) comparisons
- Aikido AI AutoFix vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Amazon Q Developer security scanning vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Black Duck Signal (agentic AI AppSec) vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Checkmarx One Assist vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)
- Claude Code security review vs StackHawk Wingman (find-fix-verify security for AI coding agents)