Strike
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Strike'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
|
Strike
|
|
Focus
|
PTaaS
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
ASM, compliance suite and phishing
monitor
|
|
Headcount
|
84 | ||
|
Headcount distribution
|
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 21%, IT 11%, sales 21%,
marketing 6%, operations 7% and others 34%
|
|
|
Headcount growth
|
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
-7%, +45%, +133%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
AR, MX, UK, US and UY
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
AR and US
|
|
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
No reviews
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
12K based on the following: Instagram,
LinkedIn, X
and YouTube
|
|
|
Research Firms
|
None
|
None
|
Gigaom
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2021
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$19.4M USD in 3 rounds from 15
investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
1M to 5M
|
|
| CVEs as CNA Researcher |
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
None | |
|
Bug bounty
|
No | ||
|
Visits
|
21K per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
10K per month. Top 3: 23% CL, 14% PE,
14% MX. Others
49%
|
|
|
Authority
|
27 out of 100
|
||
| Public vulnerability DB |
Discovered and third-party
|
None
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, e-books and success cases
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 4 in common
and 9 additional
|
No
|
|
|
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
|
Free trial and PoV
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
|
Open Demo
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
2 plans (Strike scanner, Premium
pentesting). None transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
Annually
|
||
|
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
|
DAST
|
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
6 targets
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Targets
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
Yes
|
||
|
Free support
|
Yes
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Strike
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No information available | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
No information available
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
No information available
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
None
|
|
SLA
|
No | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
None
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
37 from 24 different types
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Contractor or employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards, 6 in common and 61
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
6 standards, all in common
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human
intelligence
|
||
|
Remediation
|
5, none in common
|
Same, plus 1
|
1
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
6, 3 in common and 3 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Strike
|
|
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
|
None
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
External (Invicti for DAST)
|
||
|
SCA
|
No
|
||
|
AI security
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
SBOM
|
No
|
||
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
No
|
||
|
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
|
4 types of APIs, all in common
|
4 types of APIs, all in common
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
No
|
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, none in common
|
1 function
|
|
|
MCP
|
No
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Provisioning as Code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS (no tenancy information)
|
||
| Regions |
No information available
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Strike
|
|
SCM
|
None
|
||
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, 1 in common and 2 additional
|
1 in common
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
1 |
|
IDE
|
None
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
None
|
||
|
SCA
|
None
|
||
|
Container
|
None | ||
|
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
|
1
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary source of information was strike.sh, which was supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Strike
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.