ZeroPath
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to ZeroPath'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
|
ZeroPath
|
|
Focus
|
|||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
|
|
Headcount
|
6 | ||
|
Headcount Distribution
|
|||
|
Headcount Growth
|
|||
|
Headquarters
|
|||
|
Countries
|
|||
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
No reviews
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
||
|
Research firms
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Founded
|
2001 | ||
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$500K USD in 2 rounds from 4 investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Revenue
|
|||
| CVEs as CNA Researcher | |||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
SOC 2 Type II | |
|
Bug Bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
| Public vulnerability DB |
None
|
||
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog and documentation
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 3 in common and 10 additional
|
3 documentation sections, all in common
|
|
|
Community
|
Chat (discord)
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
No
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
||
| Marketplaces | None | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Free trial
|
No
|
||
|
Demo
|
|||
|
Open Demo
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
|||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
2 plans (Core, Enterprise). One
transparent
|
|
Minimum term
|
|||
|
Minimum payment period
|
|||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
|||
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
||
|
Pricing drivers
|
|||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
|||
|
Free implementation
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free support
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
ZeroPath
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
||
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
No information available | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No information available
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
||
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
||
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
1 reattack
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day
vulnerability research
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research powered by AI
|
|
SLA
|
Response (Managed appsec) | ||
|
Min availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
None
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
None
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
||
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards, 11 in common and 56
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
14 standards, 11 in common and 3
additional
|
|
Detection method
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
5, 4 in common and 1 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
4, all in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5, none in common
|
Same, plus 2
|
2, none in common
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
ZeroPath
|
|
ASPM
|
No
|
||
|
API
|
|||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
1 functionality in common
|
|
CLI
|
|||
|
CI/CD
|
|||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources
|
No information available
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
|||
|
Custom prioritization
|
No
|
||
|
Scanner origin
|
|||
|
SCA
|
23 package managers, 10 in common and 13
additional
|
12 package managers, 10 in common and 2 additional
|
|
|
AI security
|
No
|
||
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
|||
|
SBOM
|
22 package managers, 8 in common and 14
additional
|
12 package managers, 8 in common and 4 additional
|
|
|
Malware detection
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Containers
|
4 distributions, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
5 distributions, 2 in common and 3
additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, 11 in common and 1 additional
|
18, 11 in common and 7 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, 5 in common and 17 additional
|
6, 5 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
IaC
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
7, 6 in common and 1 additional
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary in common
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
1 type of binary in common
|
|
DAST
|
No
|
||
|
API security testing
|
No
|
4 types of APIs, 3 in common and 1
additional
|
4 types of APIs, 3 in common and 1 additional
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
15 secrets types, 3 in common and 8
additional
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
11 secrets type, 3 in common and 8 additional
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, 2 in common and 2
additional
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
MCP
|
|||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
|
Provisioning as Code
|
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
|||
| Regions | |||
|
Status
|
|||
|
Incidents
|
No information available
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
ZeroPath
|
|
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
|
2, 1 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
1 |
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 5 in common and 16 additional
|
5, all in common
|
|
|
SCA
|
|||
|
Container
|
None | ||
|
SAST
|
|||
|
DAST
|
None
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
None
|
||
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
|||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Bug bounty
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
References were last checked on Dec 01, 2025.
More like ZeroPath
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.