Hopper Security
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Hopper Security'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
|
Hopper
|
|
Focus
|
Software Supply Chain Security
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
19 | ||
|
Headcount distribution
|
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 42%, IT 11%, marketing 5%,
operations 5% and others 37%
|
|
|
Headcount growth
|
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
+12%, +36%, +138%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
IL and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
IL and US | |
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
No reviews
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
1K based on the following: LinkedIn
and YouTube
|
|
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2023
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$7.6M USD in 2 rounds from 6 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
No information available
|
|
|
CVEs as CNA Researcher
|
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II | |
|
Bug bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
615 per month. Top 3: 57% US, 33% CA,
9% IL. Others 1%
|
|
|
Authority
|
20 out of 100
|
||
|
Public vulnerability DB
|
Discovered and third-party
|
None
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, documentation and newsroom
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 1 in common
and 12 additional
|
1 documentation section in common
|
|
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct
|
|
| Marketplaces | None | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
PoC
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
No information available
|
|
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
|
Software Supply Chain Security
|
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
No information available
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
No information available
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free support
|
No information available
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Hopper
|
|
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 | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99% per month
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
Not applicable
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee or freelance
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
Not applicable
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
No information available
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools and AI
|
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
3, all in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
4, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Hopper
|
|
ASPM
|
No
|
||
|
API
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
IDE
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
No
|
|
|
CLI
|
No
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Does not break the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS, EPSS and KEV
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house
|
||
|
SCA
|
Yes. No information available
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
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)
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
No
|
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
IaC
|
No
|
||
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
No
|
|
DAST
|
No
|
||
|
API security testing
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
No
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, 2 in common and 1
additional
|
2 functions, all in common | |
|
MCP
|
Yes | ||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Provisioning as code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS + on-premises (no tenancy
information)
|
||
| Regions |
No information available
|
||
|
Status
|
No
|
||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Hopper
|
|
SCM
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
4, all in common
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 1 in common and 2 additional
|
1 in common
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
None |
|
IDE
|
None
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
None
|
||
|
SCA
|
Native
|
||
|
Container
|
Native | ||
|
SAST
|
None
|
||
|
DAST
|
None
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
None
|
||
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
None
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary source of information was
hopper.security, which was supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media,
and other sources.
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.