# AI Audits vs Human Audits

> What We Learned Running Both on the Same Codebase

**Published by:** [Zyfai](https://blog.zyf.ai/)
**Published on:** 2026-04-08
**Categories:** audit, ai, crypto, vault, defi, yield
**URL:** https://blog.zyf.ai/ai-audits-vs-human-audits

## Content

We recently put our ERC-7540 vault contracts through two audits back to back: one by Cecuro, an AI-powered auditing tool, and one by Sherlock, with experienced human security researchers. We wanted to share our honest experience, because we think the conversation around AI in smart contract security is often too binary: either "AI will replace auditors" or "AI audits are useless." Neither is true.Agent VaultsZyfaiMar 30, 2026Of the $20B in onchain capital allocation, only $40M runs automatically. Most of DeFi's capital management is handled manually by wealth managers. Zyfai is here to change that.0 collectedCollectThe Overlap Was ReassuringThe first thing we noticed was how much the two audits agreed on. Several findings appeared in both reports:The ERC-7540 compliance issues (preview functions not reverting, incorrect event units, requestId semantics) were caught by both Cecuro and Sherlock independently.The totalAssets() revert violation against ERC-4626 spec appeared in both reports.The deviation rate bypass via allocatedAssets == 0 was flagged by both.The setSmartAccount accounting inconsistency was caught by both.The core economic vulnerability around fixed-asset redemption pricing, arguably the most impactful finding in the entire audit, was independently identified by both.This overlap is actually the most encouraging signal. When an AI and experienced human auditors converge on the same issues independently, it builds confidence that those findings are real and well-reasoned. For us, it also validated that Cecuro was doing genuine analysis rather than pattern-matching against known CVEs.Where Humans Were IrreplaceableThat said, the Sherlock audit gave us something the AI simply couldn't: a back-and-forth conversation that changed our minds about certain implementation decisions. There were findings where we initially pushed back, believing certain behaviors were deliberate design choices rather than vulnerabilities. The dialogue with Sherlock forced us to think through the failure scenarios more carefully, and in several cases we changed our position. Those turned out to be the right calls, and we wouldn't have made them without that back-and-forth. No matter how well-reasoned a finding is on paper, there's something about a human auditor who can engage with your counterarguments and stress-test your assumptions that a report alone can't replicate. Zyfai @Zyfai_ To close the year on a high note, Zyfai has completed a comprehensive, end-to-end protocol audit by @sherlockdefi. No major issues were found, marking a key milestone in establishing trust in Agentic Finance. The audit report is available below 65 4:39 PM • Dec 25, 2025 Human auditors also brought findings that required understanding the broader deployment context: things like the missing emergency pause mechanism, the absence of a two-step ownership transfer, and the no-timeout on pending withdrawal requests. These aren't bugs in the strict sense, but they reflect a seasoned auditor's understanding of how protocols fail in production. That kind of judgment is hard to replicate.The Right Mental ModelAfter running both, here's how we'd frame it: an AI audit is a high-quality first pass. It catches a meaningful portion of real issues quickly and cheaply, and it produces well-reasoned, clearly explained findings. Cecuro in particular impressed us: several of its LOW findings overlapped with what Sherlock independently found, and its analysis of the economic vulnerability in the redemption flow was as sharp as anything in the human audit report. Cecuro @CecuroAudit We tested our AI security agent on 90 real-world exploited contracts. $228M in total losses. 92% detection rate. $96.8M protected. 13x better than general-purpose AI. Featured in @CoinDesk 0 7:27 PM • Feb 21, 2026 But it doesn't replace a human audit. The value of a human auditor isn't just in the list of findings. It's in the conversation, the pushback, the ability to weigh in on whether a theoretical issue is a real threat given your specific deployment context, and the experience to know which design decisions will cause operational pain six months from now.Why This Matters for the EcosystemCecuro provided their audit for free during their launch week for a select few projects, and we're genuinely grateful for that. Security is expensive, and in the current market conditions even teams that are committed to doing things right are working with tight budgets. Every tool that makes rigorous security review more accessible matters. If AI auditing tools can get good enough to catch the majority of critical and high issues, they become a meaningful safety net for teams who can't yet afford a full human audit. It's not a replacement, but a genuine improvement over shipping unreviewed code. That's a real contribution to making DeFi safer overall. We'll be using both going forward: AI for early feedback during development, and human auditors before any significant launch. We'd encourage other teams to think about it the same way.About ZyfaiZyfai gives you self-custodial access to autonomous low-risk DeFi. Our customizable rule-based Agents transform your idle capital into productive assets, rebalancing between curated opportunities. The result is sustainable and risk-adjusted yield, where your capital is always working and under your control. Explore Zyfai | Follow on X | Read blog | Explore Docs

## Publication Information

- [Zyfai](https://blog.zyf.ai/): Publication homepage
- [All Posts](https://blog.zyf.ai/): More posts from this publication
- [RSS Feed](https://api.paragraph.com/blogs/rss/@zyfai): Subscribe to updates