Chainguard
Last updated: Oct 5, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Chainguard'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 | Chainguard |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 186 | Same | 784 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42%, IT 12%, sales 16%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 24% | Same | Engineering 23%, IT 10%, sales 29%, marketing 5%, operations 2% and others 31% |
| Headcount growth | +3%, +21%, +29% | Same | +14%, +35%, +258% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | US |
| Countries | AR, BO, BR, CL, CO, CR, DO, EC, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | AR, AU, BR, CA, CH, DE, DK, ES, FR, GB, HK, IE, IN, IT, LU, NL, PL, PT, SE, SG, TR, US and ZA |
| Reputation | 9.27 from 388 reviews over 7 years on Clutch, G2 and Gartner | Same | 8.60 from 83 reviews over 3 years on G2, Gartner and PeerSpot |
| Followers | 23K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 77K based on the following: Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | Gartner, IDC, Latio and Omdia |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2021 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $892M USD in 6 rounds from 25 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 5M to 50M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | None |
| 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 | Cyber Essentials, GDPR, ISO/IEC 27001:2022 and SOC 2 Type II |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 64K per month. Top 3: 18% CO, 9% US, 5% BR. Others 68% | Same | 166K per month. Top 3: 33% US, 10% GB, 8% IN. Others 51% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 39 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | Third-party |
| Content | Blog, documentation, e-books, glossary, reports, success stories, videos, webinars and white papers | Same | Blog, case studies, courses, documentation, events, guides, newsroom, reports and webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections, 2 in common and 11 additional | Same | 6 documentation sections, 2 in common and 4 additional |
| Community | Forum | Same | Chat(Slack) |
| Sync training | 1 workshop | Same | No |
| Async training | 3 product use courses | Same | 4 product use courses and 4 security education courses(free) |
| Distribution | Direct or with any of its 14 partners | Same | Direct or with any of its partners |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | AWS, Azure, GCP and GitHub |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | Free trial and PoV |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales, marketplace and public web |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | 3 plans (Catalog, Per Ecosystem and Per Image). First 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, PTaaS, RE and SCR | Hardened open source artifacts |
| Minimum scope | 10 authors | Same | 1 developer |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Images and developers |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No information available |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Chainguard |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | None |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | Support |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | No information available |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | Yes |
| Accreditations | CNA, Penetration Testing by CREST and OpenSSF Gold Badge | Same | CNA |
| 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, 9 in common and 58 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 10 standards, 7 in common and 3 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | Automated tools |
| Remediation | 5, 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 1 | 2, 1 in common and 1 additional |
| Output | 5, 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 2 | 1 in common |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Chainguard |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | Does not break the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 18 sources, 3 in common and 15 additional | Same | 4 sources, 3 in common and 1 additional |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Transitivity and Use | Same | CVSS v3 and KEV |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house and external (Grype for containers) |
| SCA | 19 package managers | Same | No |
| AI security | No | Yes | No |
| Reachability | 14 languages | Same | No |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Not applicable |
| SBOM | 22 package managers | Same | Yes. No information available |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Autofix on components | No | No | No |
| Containers | 4 distributions | Same | No |
| Source SAST (languages) | 14 | Same | No |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 23 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | No |
| IaC | 6 | 2 | No |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary | Same, plus 2 types of binaries | No |
| 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 | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | No |
| AI | 4 functions | Same | No |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | No | No | Apache License 2.0 |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS (no tenancy information) |
| Regions | US | Same | No information available |
| Status | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Incidents | 3 per year | Same | 2 per year |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Chainguard |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6, 1 in common and 5 additional | Same | 1 in common |
| Binary repositories | None | None | 6 |
| Ticketing | 3 | Same | None |
| ChatOps | None | None | None |
| IDE | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 2, 1 in common and 1 additional |
| CI/CD | 21, 1 in common and 20 additional | Same | 5, all in common |
| SCA | Native | Same | None |
| Container | Native | Same | None |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | None |
| MAST | None | Native | None |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Cloud | 1, all in common | Same | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional |
| CSPM | Native | Same | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | None |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | 16 |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
The latest update to this comparison was on 2026-09-29. The primary sources of information were chainguard.dev and edu.chainguard.dev, which were supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Chainguard
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 Essential plan. If you prefer the Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' pentesting team, fill out this contact form.
Tags
comparemalwareopensourcesbom