Cycode
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Cycode's? The following comparison table enables you to discern
the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s cybersecurity
needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Cycode
|
|
Focus
|
Native ASPM with built-In Scanners
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
161
|
||
|
Headcount distribution
|
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 32%, IT 9%, sales 14%,
marketing 6% and others 39%
|
|
|
Headcount growth
|
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
-1%, +7%, 26%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
IL and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
IL, US and PL | |
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
8.73 from 55 reviews over 4 years
on G2 and Gartner
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
21K based on the following:
Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube
|
|
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
Gartner, IDC and Omdia
|
|
Founded
|
2019
|
||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$80.6M USDin 3 rounds from 6 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 0 times and made 1 acquisition
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
4M to 38M
|
|
|
CVEs as CNA Researcher
|
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
CSA STAR Level 1, ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II
|
|
|
Bug bounty
|
Yes
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
17K per month. Top 3: 25% US, 13% ZA, 11% IN. Others 51%
|
|
|
Authority
|
32 out of 100
|
||
|
Public vulnerability DB
|
Discovered and third-party
|
None
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, e-books, reports and webinars
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
No
|
||
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its 10 partners
|
|
|
Marketplaces
|
AWS and GCP
|
||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
PoV
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales and marketplaces
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
|
Minimum term
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API
security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
ASPM
|
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
1 developer
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Developers
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
30 USD
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Cycode
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Zero-day vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
None
|
|
SLA
|
|
Availability and response
|
|
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99.9% per month
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards , 12 in common and 55
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
12 standards, all in common
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools and AI
|
|
|
False positives
|
6.04 times better
|
9.5 times better
|
10% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
5.25 times better
|
15.1 times better
|
5% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
5, 4 in common and 1 additional
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 2 in common and 3
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Cycode
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes
|
||
|
API
|
GraphQL with JSON
|
||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
3 functionalities, all in common
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS, EPSS and KEV
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
Risk score
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house
|
||
|
SCA
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
Yes. AIBOM
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Deterministic
|
||
|
SBOM
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Containers
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, 10 in common and 2 additional
|
18 languages, 10 in common and 8
additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
No information available
|
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
Secrets |
|
IaC
|
6, 3 in common and 3 additional
|
4, 1 in common and 3 additional
|
4, all in common
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
DAST
|
No
|
||
|
API security testing
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
No
|
||
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack
vectors and secrets exploitability
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, all in common
|
3 functions, all in common
|
|
|
MCP
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open-source
|
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
Provisioning as code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS + on-premises (no tenancy
information)
|
||
|
Regions
|
EU and US
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
2.1 per year
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Cycode
|
|
SCM
|
6, 5 in common and 1 additional
|
6, 5 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
10
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
5, 2 in common and 3 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None
|
None
|
2
|
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
18, 2 in common and 16 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 8 in common and 13 additional
|
9, 8 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
Native and 13 integrations
|
||
|
Container
|
Native
|
||
|
SAST
|
Native and 10 integrations
|
||
|
DAST
|
10
|
||
|
IAST
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
3, all in common
|
3, all in common
|
|
|
CSPM
|
8
|
||
|
Secrets
|
Native
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
1
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
1
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary source of information was cycode.com,
which was supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Cycode
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start
your 21-day free trial and discover the
benefits of the Continuous
Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the
Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.