GitLab Ultimate

How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to GitLab Ultimate'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	GitLab
Focus	Native ASPM with Built-In Scanners	AI-Powered PTaaS on top of Native ASPM with Built-In Scanners	Source code management with git version control
Extras	None	None	Built-In scanners, DevSecOps, GitOps and value stream management
Employees	130	Same	2,937
Reputation	9.82 from 60 reviews over 6 years on Gartner and Clutch	Same	8.89 from 2K reviews over 8 years on G2, Gartner, PeerSpot, Software Advice and TrustRadius
Followers	18K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube	Same	1M based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube
Research Firms	None	None	451 Research, Everest Group, Forrester, Frost & Sullivan, Gartner, GigaOM, IDC, Info-Tech Research Group and Omdia
Founded	2001	Same	2014
Funding	Bootstrapped	Same	$413.5M USD in 7 rounds from 5 investors (8 acquisitions)
Revenue	5M to 10M	Same	100M to 1B
CVE	257 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide	Same	907 CVEs reported to MITRE
Compliance	SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3	Same	CSA STAR Level 1, Cyber Essentials, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 27017, ISO 27018, SOC 2 Type 2 and TISAX
Documentation	Yes	Yes	Yes
Visits	26K per month. Top 3: 36% MY, 33% CO, 5% IN and others 26%	Same	25M per month. Top 3: 10% US, 9% IN, 5% CN and others 76%
Authority	31 out of 100	Same	70 out of 100
Distribution	Direct or with any of its 14 partners	Same	Direct or with any of its 256 partners
Marketplaces	AWS	Same	AWS, Azure and GCP
Freemium	No	No	Yes (Code security not included)
Free trial	21-day free trial	PoV	60-day free trial and PoV
Demo	Yes	Yes	Yes
Pricing	Contact sales and marketplace	Contact sales	Contact sales, marketplaces and public web
Pricing drivers	Groups	Authors	Users

Service

Attribute	Essential	Advanced	GitLab
PTaaS	No	Yes	No
Reverse engineering	No	Yes	No
Secure code review	No	Yes	No
Pivoting	No	Yes	No
Exploitation	No	Yes	No
Zero-day vulnerabilities	None	Continuous zero-day vulnerability research	None
SLA	Availability	Accuracy, availability and response	Response
Accreditations	CNA and Penetration Testing by CREST	Same	CNA
Hacker certifications	Not applicable	202 from 59 different types	Not applicable
Type of contract	Employee	Same	Employee
Standards	Some requirements from 65 standards, 15 in common and 50 additional	All requirements from the same standards	31 standards, 15 in common and 16 additional
Detection method	Automated tools	Automated tools, AI and human intelligence	Automated tools
Remediation	5, 4 in common and 1 additional	Same, plus 1	5, 4 in common and 1 additional
Outputs	5, 4 in common and 1 additional	Same, plus 2	6, 4 in common and 2 additional

Product

Attribute	Essential	Advanced	GitLab
ASPM	Yes	Yes	No
IDE	5 functionalities, 3 in common and 1 additional	Same, plus 1 functionality	3 functionalities all in common
CLI	Yes	Yes	Yes
CI/CD	Breaks the build	Same	Breaks the build
SCA	24 package managers, 15 in common and 9 additional	Same	16 package managers, 15 in common and 1 additional
Reachability	12 languages, 2 in common and 10 additional	Same	2 languages, all in common
SBOM	22 package managers, 13 in common and 9 additional	Same	16 package managers, 13 in common and 3 additional
Containers	4 distributions, 3 in common and 1 additional	Same	13 distributions, 3 in common and 10 additional
Source SAST (languages)	18, 15 in common and 3 additional	Same, plus 4. 1 in common and 3 additional	25 languages, 16 in common and 9 additional
Source SAST (frameworks)	22, 3 in common and 19 additional	Same	5 frameworks, 3 in common and 2 additional
Binary SAST	1 type of binary	Same, plus 2 types of binaries	No
DAST	10 attack surface types, 6 in common and 4 additional	Same	9 attack surface types, 6 in common and 3 additional
IAST	No	No	No
CSPM	Yes	Yes	No
Secrets	15 secrets types, 7 in common and 8 additional	Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability	135 secrets types, 7 in common and 128 additional
AI	3 functions, all in common	Same	4 functions, 3 in common and 1 additional
Open source	MPL-2.0 license. Totally equivalent to the paid version	Not applicable	MIT. Partially equivalent to the paid version
Deployment	SaaS	Same	SaaS and on-premises
Regions	US	Same	US
Status	Yes	Yes	Yes
Incidents	6 per year	Same	9.2 per year

Integrations

Attribute	Essential	Advanced	GitLab
SCM	4, 1 in common and 3 additional	Same	1 in common
Binary repositories	None	None	None
Ticketing	3, 2 in common and 1 additional	Same	9, 2 in common and 7 additional
ChatOps	None	None	3
IDE	2, all in common	Same	15, 2 in common and 13 additional
CI/CD	20, 4 in common and 28 additional	Same	4, all in common
SCA	Native scanner	Same	Native scanner and 8 integrations
Container	Native scanner	Same	Native scanner and 3 integrations
SAST	Native scanner	Same	Native scanner and 5 integrations
DAST	Native scanner	Same	Native scanner and 3 integrations
IAST	None	None	None
Cloud	3	Same	None
CSPM	Native scanner	Same	1
Secrets	Native scanner	Same	Native scanner and 1 integration
Compliance	None	None	1

References were last checked on Apr 11, 2025.

More like GitLab Ultimate

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.

Comparison between Fluid Attacks and GitLab | Fluid Attacks

GitLab Ultimate