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
|
|||
|
Headcount
Distribution
|
|||
|
Headcount
Growth
|
|||
|
Headquarters
|
|||
|
Countries
|
Same
|
||
|
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
|
|||
|
CVE
|
257 CVEs
reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10
CVE labs
worldwide
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II | ||
|
Bug Bounty
|
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
|||
|
Authority
|
|||
|
Vulnerability
database
|
None
|
||
|
Content
|
Blog and documentation
|
||
|
Knowledge
base
|
13 KB sections, 3 in common and 10 additional
|
3, 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 group
|
1 author
|
|
|
Pricing
drivers
|
|||
|
Minimum monthly
payment
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
ZeroPath
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
||
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | 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 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
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
ZeroPath
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes |
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
|
Same
|
||
|
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 comon
|
Same, plus 2 types of
binaries
|
1 type of binary in common
|
|
DAST
|
No |
||
|
API security
testing
|
No
|
x
|
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
Same, plus verify other attack
vectors and secrets
exploitability
|
x
|
|
|
AI
|
x
|
||
|
MCP
|
x
|
||
|
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
|
|
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional |
|
|
CI/CD
|
20, 5 in common and 15 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 Oct 10, 2025.
More like ZeroPath
- x
- x
- x
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.