Snyk
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Snyk'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
|
Snyk
|
|
Focus
|
Native ASPM with in-house scanners
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Headcount
|
1,220 | ||
| Headcount distribution |
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 36%, IT 11%, sales 14%,
marketing 5%, operations 3% and others 31%
|
|
| Headcount growth |
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
-8%, -7%, +3%
|
|
| Headquarters |
CO and US
|
AU, CA, CH, GB, IL, JP, RO, SG and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
UK and US
|
|
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
8.96 from 308 reviews over 7 years on
Capterra, G2, Gartner, PeerSpot and TrustRadius
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
135K based on the following: Facebook,
LinkedIn, X and YouTube
|
|
| Research firms |
None
|
None
|
Forrester, Frost & Sullivan,
GigaOm, IDC, Info-Tech Research Group and Omdia
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2015
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$1.2B USD in 13 rounds from 41
investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 0 times and made 12
acquisitions
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
100M to 500M
|
|
| CVEs as CNA Researcher |
832 CVEs reported to MITRE
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
SOC 2 Type II, ISO/IEC 27001 and
ISO/IEC 27017
|
|
| Bug bounty |
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
629K per month. Top 3: 20% US, 9% IN,
6% BR. Others 65%
|
|
|
Authority
|
49 out of 100
|
||
| Public vulnerability DB |
Discovered and third-party
|
Discovered and third-party
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, documentation, e-books, podcast,
videos, webinars and white papers
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 3 in common
and 10 additional
|
5 documentation sections, 3 in common
and 2 additional
|
|
|
Community
|
Forum, chat (discord) and talks
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
7 product use courses (free) and 7
security education courses (free)
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its 101 partners
|
|
| Marketplaces | AWS, GCP and GitHub | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Free trial
|
14-day free trial and PoC
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
| Open demo |
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales, marketplaces and public
web
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
2 plans (team, enterprise). First
transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
Monthly
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Monthly
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API
security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
Containers, IaC, SAST and SCA |
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
5 developers (active committers) | |
|
Pricing drivers
|
Developers
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
125 USD
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Snyk
|
|
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
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability
research
|
|
SLA
|
Availability andresponse | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99.9% per period
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No |
|
Accreditations
|
Amazon Linux Ready Product, DevOps
ISV Competency, Security ISV Competency and CNA
|
||
|
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, 15 in common and 52
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
16 standards, 15 in common and 1
additional
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools and AI
|
|
|
False positives
|
1.21 times better
|
1.90 times better
|
49% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
1.07 times better
|
3.07 times better
|
25% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
3, all in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
5, 4 in common and 1 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Snyk
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes (only for the Enterprise plan)
|
||
|
API
|
REST with JSON | ||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
4 functionalities, 3 in common and 1
additional
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources, none in common
|
6 sources, none in common
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CCSS, CVSS v4.0 and EPSS v3.0
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
Asset classification policy
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house and external (GitGuardian and Nightfall AI for Secrets) | ||
|
SCA
|
23 package managers, 16 in common and 7
additional
|
21 package managers, 16 in common and 5
additional
|
|
|
AI security
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages, 5 in common and 7
additional
|
5 languages, all in common
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Probabilistic
|
||
|
SBOM
|
22 package managers, 8 in common and 14 additional
|
8 package managers, all in common
|
|
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes |
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Containers
|
4 distributions, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
14 distributions, 3 in common and 11
additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, 11 in common and 1 additional
|
20 languages, 11 in common and 9
additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, 12 in common and 10 additional
|
28 frameworks, 12 in common and 16
additional
|
|
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
IaC
|
|
IaC
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
6, all in common
|
|
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 |
Yes
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
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
|
3 functions, 1 in common and 2
additional
|
1 function in common
|
|
|
MCP
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
| Provisioning as code | No | ||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS (multi-tenant) + on-premises
(single-tenant)
|
||
| Regions |
AU, EU and US
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Snyk
|
|
SCM
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
4, all in common
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
9
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 1 in common and 2 additional
|
1 in common
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
1 |
|
IDE
|
3, all in common
|
18, 3 in common and 15 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 6 in common and 15 additional
|
7, 6 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
SCA
|
Native
|
||
|
Container
|
Native and 10 integrations | ||
|
SAST
|
Native and 11 integrations
|
||
|
DAST
|
Native and 14 integrations
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
3, all in common
|
3, all in common
|
|
|
CSPM
|
Native | ||
|
Secrets
|
Native powered by GitGuardian and 5
integrations
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
3
|
| Bug bounty |
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
6
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
2
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 16, 2025. The primary sources of information
were snyk.io and docs.snyk.io, which were supplemented by specialized
information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Snyk
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.