Outdated Drivers Are Slowing You Down
One free scan finds every outdated or missing driver and matches the right update for your exact hardware.Free scan · exact hardware matchWindows Errors? Fix Them Before They Spread
Repair common Windows errors and clear accumulated junk for a smoother, more stable PC - no reinstall needed.Free scan · no reinstallReclaim Security announced a $20 million Series A on March 4, 2026, bringing its total funding to $26 million. Acrew Capital led the round, with QP Ventures and Ibex Investors participating. The company is targeting a stubborn enterprise security problem: finding vulnerabilities is often faster than safely fixing them. Reclaim says its “AI Security Engineer” can assess exposures, predict the impact of proposed changes, and help carry out remediation. The financing is verified; the product’s performance figures are company-reported and not independently established in the public material cited here.
What Reclaim Security raised—and what the $26 million figure means
The $26 million announced by Reclaim Security is its total funding, not the size of the latest round. The new financing is a $20 million Series A, according to the company’s March 4, 2026 announcement and SecurityWeek’s coverage. Acrew Capital led the round; QP Ventures and Ibex Investors also participated. The company said it would use the money to expand engineering, deepen integrations, and grow go-to-market activity in North America and Europe.
SecurityWeek reported that Reclaim was founded in 2024. Public materials cited for the financing do not disclose the company’s valuation, revenue, or a customer count, and do not identify individual customers.
Why fixing exposures can take longer than finding them
Security tools can identify a vulnerable or misconfigured system, but the team that receives the finding may not own that system or have authority to change it. A patch or policy adjustment can affect an application, user workflow, or business service; organizations may therefore require an application owner’s review, testing, and a scheduled change window. Incomplete inventories and ticket handoffs add friction, while maintenance freezes can defer even well-understood fixes.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problems2Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches3Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors#1 Best Overall
Reclaim’s funding announcement frames the gap as a race between attacker activity and enterprise remediation. It cites a 27-day average to remediate critical exposures and a 27-second attacker breakout-time figure. Those are figures presented in the company announcement, not universal benchmarks established by the cited independent coverage. Treat them as the company’s framing of the problem, not a prediction of how quickly every attack or remediation will occur.
What Reclaim says its AI Security Engineer does
Reclaim positions the product as an automated remediation system rather than simply another scanner or conversational AI assistant. Its public product description says it can correlate findings from more than 40 security tools and work across areas including endpoint, identity, browser, operating system, email, and cloud. The company describes a process that connects findings to operational context, assesses priorities, models potential effects, and recommends or carries out fixes.
Rank #2
- Ideal for Gifting
- Ideal for a bookworm
- Compact for travelling
- Discover: gather exposures reported by connected security and infrastructure tools.
- Add context: associate findings with affected assets, applications, users, workloads, or business processes.
- Prioritize: weigh the exposure and its operational context rather than relying on severity alone.
- Predict impact: use PIPE, Reclaim’s simulation and impact-prediction layer, to estimate possible effects of a proposed change.
- Remediate and validate: recommend or execute a change under customer controls, then check whether the finding has been addressed.
Reclaim calls PIPE the Productivity Impact Prediction Engine. The company says it predicts how a security change may affect applications, workloads, users, and business processes before deployment. SecurityWeek also describes PIPE as a way to anticipate the effects of remediation. Public descriptions do not provide a complete technical specification of its models, supported actions, customer-configurable execution controls, or rollback behavior. “AI Security Engineer” is Reclaim’s product category and marketing label; it is not evidence that the software can replace a human engineer across the remediation lifecycle.
How the product differs from adjacent security tools
The distinction Reclaim is trying to establish is execution: closing the loop between identifying a security issue and changing the affected system. The neighboring categories overlap, but they tend to emphasize different stages of the work.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
| Tool category | Typical emphasis | Question for a Reclaim evaluation |
|---|---|---|
| Vulnerability scanners | Finding vulnerabilities and assigning severity | Can the platform safely carry out the appropriate fix, or does work still pass to another team? |
| Exposure-management platforms | Connecting exposures to attack paths and helping prioritize risk | Does prioritization translate into completed remediation? |
| Vulnerability workflow tools | Ownership, tickets, service levels, and reporting | Does the underlying exposure get removed rather than just moved through a workflow? |
| Configuration-management tools | Enforcing a desired system state | Does the change account for security exposure and business context? |
| Security orchestration platforms | Automating playbooks across security tools | How much workflow design and maintenance must the customer supply? |
| AI security copilots | Explaining findings, summarizing, or recommending next steps | Can the product make changes, and if so, under what permissions and approvals? |
| Patch-management systems | Deploying software updates | Does coverage extend to relevant identity, policy, cloud, or configuration issues? |
These are evaluation categories, not a claim that every vendor in a category lacks remediation features. A buyer should compare actual supported actions and controls in its environment. The key test for Reclaim is whether it can remove risk reliably, not simply produce a recommendation or close a ticket.
What the public performance claims do—and do not—show
Reclaim’s homepage and funding announcement cite reductions in manual remediation effort, faster remediation, more project completions per engineer, business-impact prediction accuracy, and resilience or return-on-investment improvements. The specific figures differ by material: the homepage lists a 90% reduction in manual remediation work, 70% faster mean time to remediate, three times more project completions per engineer, 99.7% prediction accuracy, zero business-disruption incidents, and a fivefold security-resilience improvement. The funding announcement separately cites an 80% increase in threat resilience, a 75% improvement in return on investment from the existing security stack, and a 90% reduction in manual effort. These are company-reported claims, not independently validated outcomes in the cited coverage.
Rank #4
The public materials do not establish the methods, sample sizes, time periods, or definitions behind these figures. For example, a prediction-accuracy number is difficult to assess without knowing what counted as a prediction, how it was checked, and which environments were included. Nor should “zero business disruption” be read as a guarantee that future automated changes cannot cause an outage.
Company materials also describe a 10-day proof-of-value offer, an initial read-only deployment, and access to real findings in less than an hour. The homepage does not publish list pricing. Those are commercial signals, not evidence of a standard deployment time or a particular customer result.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREERepair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEScan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minuteDriver Scan →Best Value
- It can be a gift option
- Comes with secure packaging
- Helpful in various ways
What an enterprise buyer should test before granting write access
Predicting the impact of a change may reduce risk, but a simulation can only account for dependencies represented in its data. It may miss undocumented integrations, legacy behavior, timing-dependent failures, third-party services, or human workarounds. A technically correct security fix can still be operationally unsuitable for a particular system or moment.
- Scope and permissions: determine which systems the integrations can read or change, and whether permissions can be restricted by environment, asset, business unit, and remediation type.
- Approval gates: establish which low-risk actions may be automated and which require a named human approver. Production identity-policy changes, privileged-access changes, network segmentation, and critical healthcare or industrial systems warrant particular scrutiny.
- Rollback and recovery: test whether a change can be reversed, how long recovery takes, and whether rollback covers downstream effects rather than only the visible setting.
- Evidence and audit: require a reviewable explanation for each proposed action, an exportable record of the finding and change, and a clear account of whether a person, policy, or model authorized execution.
- Data quality: check for stale telemetry, incorrect asset ownership, and incomplete dependency mapping. Broad integration coverage can bring context, but it also introduces API permissions, schema differences, rate limits, and upkeep when connected products change.
- Change collisions: ask how the system handles simultaneous edits by employees or other automation, and how it detects a fix that closes an alert without removing the exploitable path.
- Accountability: clarify incident escalation, contractual responsibility, and remedies if an automated change causes an outage or a security failure.
A cautious proof of value should start with read-only access and a small set of low-risk remediation scenarios. Before moving to production execution, measure time to fix, manual effort, false positives, approval burden, rollback performance, and operational impact. The company’s claimed accuracy or disruption metrics are not a substitute for those tests in a buyer’s own environment.
Who might benefit—and who may not
The strongest potential fit is an enterprise with a large remediation backlog, several existing security tools, and enough asset and change-management maturity to constrain automated actions. Such an organization may have more to gain from coordinating fixes across systems than from adding another source of findings.
Reclaim may be a poor fit for a small team looking for inexpensive scanning, an organization with incomplete asset inventories, or an environment where policy requires manual validation of every change. Buyers unwilling to connect operational security data or grant any eventual remediation authority may also find that the product’s central proposition is not a match. Public pricing is not disclosed, so prospective buyers should ask for a quote and understand how cost relates to assets, integrations, or remediation volume rather than assume a per-seat price.
Depending on the existing stack, buyers can compare the use case with platforms such as Tenable, Qualys, Rapid7, Wiz, Microsoft Defender Vulnerability Management, ServiceNow Vulnerability Response, and Palo Alto Networks Cortex XSOAR. They are evaluation alternatives spanning vulnerability and exposure management, workflow, and orchestration—not necessarily direct equivalents to Reclaim’s full remediation pitch.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
