Giskard vs TrojAI
Side-by-side comparison of framework coverage, pricing, capabilities, and target customers. Last verified recently.
https://aicompliancevendors.com/compare/giskard-ai-vs-trojaiGiskard
Test your AI agents to catch issues before they happen in production
Giskard is an open-source and enterprise platform for automated red-teaming and evaluation of AI models and LLM agents, detecting vulnerabilities like hallucinations, prompt injections, biases, and robustness issues through continuous scanning and test suites. It differentiates with black-box testing, collaborative workflows for business and technical teams, and integration of domain knowledge for exhaustive, domain-specific tests. Typical buyers are AI engineering, security, and data science teams at enterprises in finance, manufacturing, public sector, and defense deploying production AI systems. The platform supports compliance via GDPR, SOC 2 Type II, and HIPAA features, and was recognized in Gartner's 2023 Market Guide for AI Trust, Risk and Security Management.
TrojAI
Deploy AI Agents with Confidence.
TrojAI is a Saint John, New Brunswick-based AI security company founded in 2019 by James Stewart and Stephen Goddard. The company provides an enterprise AI security platform with two core products: TrojAI Detect (pre-deployment model red teaming and vulnerability assessment) and TrojAI Defend (runtime AI firewall for AI applications and agents). In 2025, TrojAI extended Defend to cover MCP (Model Context Protocol) server governance, providing visibility and policy enforcement for agentic AI workflows. TrojAI serves primarily large enterprise customers in financial services and technology, helping them align with NIST, OWASP, MITRE ATLAS, and CSA frameworks. The company participated in Google's 2023 accelerator program for Canadian startups and was listed on the Vector Institute's '20 Canadian AI Startups to Watch.' TrojAI raised $5.75M in seed capital in April 2024 and maintains offices in Saint John, Fredericton, and Boston.
What the data shows
We haven't published an editorial verdict on this pair yet. The comparison below is built from public vendor materials and our taxonomy — no editorialized ranking.
- Shared framework coverage: None documented in common.
- Only Giskard covers: GDPR Art. 22, HIPAA, SOC 2
- Only TrojAI covers: EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF
- Shared capabilities: 5 of 10 listed.
Want our editorial take? Email the editors or read our methodology.
At a glance
| Attribute | Giskard | TrojAI |
|---|---|---|
| Founded | 2021 | 2019 |
| Headquarters | Paris, France | Saint John, Canada |
| Employees | 11-50 | 11-50 |
| Funding | $4.9M total (Grant, May 2024) | Seed, $5.75M raised (April 2024), led by Flying Fish with participation from Build Ventures, Techstars, Alteryx Ventures, and Flybridge Capital Partners. Prior seed of $3M (2022). Total raised approximately $8M. |
| Pricing | Contact for pricing | Enterprise-only, no public pricing. Contact sales at troj.ai. |
| Website | Visit site | Visit site |
Framework coverage
| Framework | Giskard | TrojAI |
|---|---|---|
| EU AI Act | — | Partial |
| GDPR Art. 22 | Comprehensive | — |
| HIPAA | Comprehensive | — |
| NIST AI RMF | — | Partial |
| SOC 2 | Comprehensive | — |
Capabilities
| Capability | Giskard | TrojAI |
|---|---|---|
| Audit Evidence Collection | — | ✓ |
| Bias & Fairness Testing | ✓ | ✓ |
| Drift Detection | ✓ | — |
| Explainability | ✓ | ✓ |
| LLM Evaluation | ✓ | — |
| LLM Guardrails & Content Filtering | — | ✓ |
| LLM Red Teaming | ✓ | ✓ |
| Model Monitoring | ✓ | ✓ |
| Policy Management | — | ✓ |
| Risk Assessment Workflow | ✓ | ✓ |
Industries served
Giskard
- Financial Services
- Healthcare
- Government & Public Sector
- Defense & National Security
- Manufacturing
- SaaS & Technology
TrojAI
- Financial Services
- Healthcare
- Insurance
- Defense & National Security
Integrations
Giskard
- MLflow
- OpenAI API
- LiteLLM
- Ollama
TrojAI
- OpenAI API
Get quotes from both
Want a side-by-side proposal? Send a single structured request to Giskard and TrojAI and each will reply with scope, pricing, and timelines. You'll see exactly what we share before submitting.
Vendors pay a flat per-lead fee when they receive a qualified request. That fee does not influence what you see on this page. Details.
Editorial independence: This comparison is free and was not paid for by either vendor. See our methodology.