Binarly
Last updated: Sep 1, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Binarly'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 | Binarly |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | Software Supply Chain Security |
| Extras | None | None | None |
| Headcount | 157 | Same | 43 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 40%, IT 14%, sales 15%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 25% | Same | Engineering 21%, IT 14%, sales 7%, marketing 2%, operations 2% and others 54% |
| Headcount growth | +14%, +15%, -1% | Same | -4%, -9%, +5% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | US |
| Countries | AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | DE, GB, JP, MY and US |
| Reputation | 9.44 from 228 reviews over 8 years on Gartner and Clutch | Same | No reviews |
| Followers | 22K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 11K based on the following: LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2021 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $14.1M USD in 2 rounds from 14 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 100K to 5M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | 212 CVEs reported to MITRE |
| Compliance | GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001:2022, ISO/IEC 27017:2015, ISO/IEC 27018:2019, ISO/IEC 27701:2019, PCI DSS, SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3 | Same | SOC 2 Type II |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 64K per month. Top 3: 18% CO, 9% US, 5% BR. Others 68% | Same | 14K per month. Top 3: 11% IN, 26% US and 23% VN. Others 40% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 28 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | Discovered |
| Content | Blog, documentation, e-books, glossary, reports, success stories, videos, webinars and white papers | Same | Advisories, blogs, case studies, documentation, news, patents, press, reports, tools and videos & webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections, 9 in common and 4 additional | Same | 12 documentation sections, 9 in common and 3 additional |
| Community | Forum | Same | No |
| Sync training | 1 workshop | Same | No |
| Async training | 3 product use courses, all free | Same | No |
| Distribution | Direct or with any of its 14 partners | Same | Direct |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | None |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | No |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | 3 plans (Lite, Enterprise and Advanced). None transparent |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | No information available |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | No information available |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: AI SAST, API security testing, MAST, PTaaS, RE and SCR | Binary SAST, SBOM and SCA |
| Minimum scope | 1 author | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Number of firmware/software components analyzed, cloud workloads, container scanning needs and required API integrations |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No information available |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Binarly |
|---|---|---|---|
| PTaaS | No | Yes | No |
| Reverse engineering | No | Yes | No |
| Secure code review | No | Yes | No |
| Pivoting | No | Yes | No |
| Exploitation | No | Yes | No |
| Manual reattacks | Not applicable | Unlimited reattacks | Not applicable |
| Zero-day vulnerabilities | Scanner-based zero-day vulnerability detection | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | No information available |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | No information available |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | No |
| Accreditations | CNA, Penetration Testing by CREST and OpenSSF Gold Badge | Same | None |
| Pentester certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | Not applicable |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee |
| Endpoint control | No | Total | No |
| Channel control | No | Total | No |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards, 1 in common and 66 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 2 standards, 1 in common and 1 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | Automated tools |
| Remediation | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 | 1 in common |
| Output | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 2 | 7, 2 in common and 5 additional |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Binarly |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | REST with JSON |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same, plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Breaks the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 18 sources, 10 in common and 8 additional | Same | 23 sources, 10 in common and 13 additional |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Transitivity and Use | Same | CVSS, EMS, EPSS, KEV, LEV and SSVC |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | Binarly Risk Score |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house |
| SCA | 19 package managers, 3 in common and 16 additional | Same | 3 package managers, all in common |
| AI security | No | Yes | No |
| Reachability | 14 languages | Same | Yes. No information available |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Deterministic |
| SBOM | 22 package managers, 3 in common and 19 additional | Same | 3 package managers, all in common |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Autofix on components | No | No | No |
| Containers | 4 distributions, 3 in common and 1 additional | Same | 6 distributions, 3 in common and 3 additional |
| Source SAST (languages) | 14 | Same | No |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 23 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | YARA rules, FwHunt rules and custom detection rulesets |
| IaC | 6 | 2 | No |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary in common | Same, plus 2 types of binaries | 27 types of binaries, 1 in common and 26 additional |
| DAST | 7 attack surface types | Same | No |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs | No |
| MAST | No | Yes | No |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| CSPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| Secrets | 228 secrets types, 7 in common and 221 additional | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | 8 secrets types, 7 in common and 1 additional |
| AI | 4 functions, 2 in common and 2 additional | Same, plus 1 function | 4 functions, 2 in common and 2 additional |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | No | No | GPL-3.0 license, partially equivalent to the paid version |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS (single-tenant) + on-premises (no tenancy information) |
| Regions | US | Same | No information available |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 3 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Binarly |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6 | Same | None |
| Binary repositories | None | None | None |
| Ticketing | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 1 in common |
| ChatOps | None | None | 1 |
| IDE | 3 | Same | None |
| CI/CD | 21, 3 in common and 18 additional | Same | 3, all in common |
| SCA | Native | Same | Native |
| Container | Native | Same | Native |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | None |
| MAST | None | Native | None |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Cloud | 1 | Same | None |
| CSPM | Native | Same | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | Native |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | None |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
The latest update to this comparison was on 2026-09-01. The primary sources of information were binarly.io and docs.binarly.io, which were supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Binarly
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.
Tags
comparebinarycontainersmalwareopensourcereachabilitysbomscasecrets