Prancer
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Prancer'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
|
Prancer
|
|
Focus
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Headcount
|
|||
|
Headcount
Distribution
|
|||
|
Headcount
Growth
|
|||
|
Headquarters
|
|||
|
Countries
|
Same
|
||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
No
reviews
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
No information available
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
|
CVE
|
257 CVEs
reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10
CVE labs
worldwide
|
0 CVEs reported to MITRE
|
|
|
Compliance
|
ISO/IEC 27001 and SOC 2 Type II | ||
|
Bug Bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Vulnerability
database
|
No information available
|
||
|
Content
|
Same
|
||
|
Knowledge
base
|
13 KB sections, 3
in common and 10 additional
|
3 KB sections, all
in common
|
|
|
Community
|
No
|
||
|
Sync
training
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Async
training
|
3 product
use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
||
| Marketplaces | Azure | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
|||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
|
Minimum
commit
|
|||
|
Minimum payment
period
|
|||
|
Minimum
capabilities
|
|||
|
Minimum
scope
|
1 group
|
1 author
|
100 resources
|
|
Pricing
drivers
|
|||
|
Minimum monthly
payment
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Prancer
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
||
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | Yes |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
||
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
||
|
Manual
reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
||
|
SLA
|
No information available | ||
|
Min
availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
No information available
|
|
|
After-sale
guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
None
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
|
|
Endpoint
control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Channel
control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements
from 66 standards, 18 in
common and 48 additional
|
All requirements from
the same standards
|
18, all
in common
|
|
Detection method
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
5, 3 in
common and 2 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
3, all
in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5,
2 in common and 3 additional
|
Same,
plus 2
|
4,
2 in common and 2 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Prancer
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes | ||
|
API
|
|||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 2 in
common and 3 additional
|
Same, plus 1
functionality
|
2 functionalities,
all in common
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
Vulnerability
sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Priority
criteria
|
Same
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner
origin
|
|||
|
SCA
|
Yes. No
information available
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
type
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
SBOM
|
No
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
No
|
||
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12,
10 in common and 2 additional
|
18, 10 in common
and 8 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, none in common
|
||
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
Custom rules for
test
|
|
IaC
|
6,
3 in common and 3 additional
|
4,
1 in common and 3 additional
|
5, 4 in
common and 1 additional
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type
of binary
|
Same, plus 2 types of
binaries
|
Yes. No
information available
|
|
DAST
|
Yes. No information available |
||
|
API security
Testing
|
No
|
4 types
of APIs, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes | ||
|
Environments
|
Left & Right
(included)
|
Same
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Secrets
|
15 secrets
types, 5 in common and 10 additional
|
Same, plus verify other attack
vectors and secrets
exploitability
|
5 secrets
types, all in common
|
|
AI
|
4 functions,
2 in common and 2 additional
|
2 functions,
all in common
|
|
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
MPL-2.0
license, partially equivalent
to the paid version
|
|
|
Provisioning as Code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS and
on-premises
|
||
| Regions |
No information available
|
||
|
Status
|
No
|
||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Prancer
|
|
SCM
|
4, 3 in
common and 1 additional
|
3, all in
common
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 2 in common and 1
additional
|
2, all in common |
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
|
|
IDE
|
3, 1 in common and 2
additional
|
1 in common |
|
|
CI/CD
|
20, 1 in
common and 19 additional
|
1 in
common
|
|
|
SCA
|
|||
|
Container
|
None |
||
|
SAST
|
|||
|
DAST
|
|||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
3, all in
common
|
||
|
CSPM
|
Native | ||
|
Secrets
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Aug 29, 2025.
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.