Both fix code autonomously.
One does it proactively.
Baz fixes issues in your PRs. Hyrax finds issues your PRs haven't surfaced yet.
Same category, different trigger: Baz runs when a PR opens, Hyrax runs before one does.
Join the waitlistSame category. Different trigger.
Different economics.
BAZ DOES WELL
- Autonomous fix execution on pull requests - the key capability that puts Baz in Hyrax's competitive tier
- Claims #1 precision benchmark in code review
- PR-level review with line-by-line inline comments
- Integrates with GitHub PR workflow natively
- Validates the seat + per-fix pricing model that the market accepts
HYDRA ADDS
- Proactive full-codebase scanning - finds issues before they reach a PR
- 13-step verification: isolated worktree, baseline tests, regression gate, build verification, format/lint, post-fix audit, reviewer agent
- Linear ticket lifecycle: creates and closes tickets automatically
- Clear pricing: Pro $30/mo, Team $200/mo - credits included
Baz validates that autonomous fix execution works.
- -The fact that Baz exists and has customers is signal: teams pay for a tool that executes changes, not just suggests them
- -PR-triggered execution on the diff in that PR - the same fundamental capability as Hyrax
- -Claims #1 precision benchmark in code review (methodology not published)
Hyrax runs before the PR opens.
- -Baz runs when a PR opens, on the code in that PR - reactive, not proactive
- -Hyrax scans the full codebase continuously - finds issues before they reach a PR
- -By the time a PR opens in Hyrax-monitored repos, many issues have already been found and fixed
Per-fix billing compounds at team scale.
- -Baz charges per seat plus a per-fix fee - a developer triggering 20 fixes pays the seat plus compute on each
- -Hyrax: Pro $30/mo, Team $200/mo - credits included
- -At higher fix volumes, Hyrax's credit-included pricing is significantly lower total cost than seat-plus-per-fix billing
Which tool fits your workflow?
CHOOSE HYDRA IF...
- You want proactive scanning before PRs open, not reactive PR-level fixes only
- Predictable pricing matters - Pro $30/mo, Team $200/mo with included credits
- Linear ticket lifecycle closure is a requirement
- You want 13-step verification with published verification steps
CHOOSE BAZ IF...
- Your workflow is entirely PR-centric - you want review and execution in one place
- PR-level precision is your primary metric
- You prefer per-fix billing over a higher flat seat price
- You're already integrated deeply into GitHub's PR workflow
Baz vs Hyrax, feature by feature.
| Feature | Baz | Hyrax |
|---|---|---|
| ArchitectureFull codebase discovery + documentation | ||
| Application profiling + context weighting | ||
| Deterministic scanner patterns | ||
| Multi-agent parallel LLM analysisHyrax: 6 groups / 40+ dims | ||
| Six parallel domain agent groups | ||
| ExecutionAutonomous fix executionBaz: PR-triggered only; no published verification | ||
| 13-step verification before mergeHyrax: 13-step verification; Baz has not published theirs | ||
| Linear ticket lifecycle closure | ||
| Continuous improvement (not PR-triggered) | ||
| GovernanceSelf-generating governance rules | ||
| PricingPLG free tierHyrax: 1 repo, 15 findings/fixes per month | ||
| Compute credits includedBaz: seat + per-fix billing |
Frequently asked questions
Baz claims the highest precision benchmark in the market, but has not published the benchmark methodology or test set. Qodo, Augment, and GitHub Copilot have all published third-party benchmark results. A precision claim without methodology is not independently verifiable. Hyrax has not published a code review benchmark yet either - we'll say so directly rather than claim #1 on an unpublished test.
The main difference is trigger and scope. Baz runs when a PR opens, on the code in that PR. Hyrax runs proactively on your full codebase - not waiting for a PR. The second difference is verification. Hyrax's fix execution goes through 13-step verification: isolated worktree, baseline tests written before the fix, regression gate, build verification, format/lint check, post-fix audit, and a reviewer agent pass. Baz has not published their execution model.
Hyrax has two paid tiers: Pro ($30/mo with $30 in credits) and Team ($200/mo with $200 in credits, unlimited repos, unlimited editors). Baz charges per seat plus a per-fix fee - every fix adds cost on top of the seat.
Yes. Both offer trial access. Key things to evaluate: how each tool behaves when a fix fails a test, whether the fix history is auditable, and total cost at your actual fix volume.
Yes. Hyrax's PR Review workflow reviews pull requests and leaves inline findings. The difference from Baz is that Hyrax also runs proactively on the codebase between PR events - so by the time a PR opens, many of the issues have already been found and fixed.