Inspectiv
How does Fluid Attacks’ solution compare to Inspectiv’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 | I****nspectiv |
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | PTaaS |
| Extras | None | None | Bug bounty, DAST and VDP |
| Headcount | 143 | Same | 62 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42% , IT 13%, sales 13%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26% | Same | Engineering 11%, IT 23%, sales 26%, marketing 3%, operations 5% and others 32% |
| Headcount growth | +8% , +10%, -8% | Same | +15%, +41%, +38% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | US |
| Countries | AR , BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | US |
| Reputation | 9.77 from 209 reviews over 7 years on Gartner and Clutch | Same | No reviews |
| Followers | 20K based on the following: Facebook , Instagram , LinkedIn , X and YouTube | Same | 10K based on the following: Facebook, LinkedIn and X |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2018 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $18.7M USD in 3 rounds from 11 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 5M to 10M |
| CVEs as CNA Researcher | 276 CVEs reported to MITRE , ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | Not applicable, as it is not a CNA Researcher |
| Compliance | SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3 | Same | None |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 21K per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59% | Same | 9K per month. Top 3: 35% IN, 17% US, 9% EG. Others 39% |
| Authority | 32 out of 100 | Same | 25 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | None |
| Content | Blog , documentation , e-books , glossary , reports, success stories , videos , webinars and white papers | Same | Blog, case studies, e-books, news and webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections | Same | No |
| 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 or with any of its partners |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | None |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | PoC |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | No information available |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | Quarterly |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | Quarterly |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM , binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: API security testing , PTaaS, RE and SCR | Platform that centralizes client findings |
| Minimum scope | 1 author | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Number of hours |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Inspectiv |
| PTaaS | No | Yes | Yes |
| Reverse engineering | No | Yes | No information available |
| Secure code review | No | Yes | No information available |
| Pivoting | No | Yes | No information available |
| Exploitation | No | Yes | No information available |
| Manual reattacks | Not applicable | Unlimited reattacks | Unlimited reattacks |
| Zero-day vulnerabilities | None | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research | None |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy , availability and response | Availability and response |
| Minimum availability | >=99.95% per minute LTM | Same | ≥ 99.50% per month |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | No |
| Accreditations | CNA and Penetration Testing by CREST | Same | None |
| Hacker certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | 10 from 9 different types |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee |
| Endpoint control | Not applicable | Total | No |
| Channel control | Not applicable | Total | No |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards , 4 in common and 63 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 4 standards, all in common |
| Detection method | Automated tools | Automated tools , AI and human intelligence | Automated tools , AI and human intelligence |
| Remediation | 5Â , 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 1Â | 1 in common |
| Outputs | 5Â | Same, plus 2Â | No information available |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Inspectiv |
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | Yes. No information available |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same , plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | No |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Does not break the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 4 sources | Same | No information available |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0 , CVSSF , EPSS and KEV | Same | CVSS |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house |
| SCA | 23 package managers | Same | No |
| AI security | No | Yes | No |
| Reachability | 12 languages | Same | No |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Not applicable |
| SBOM | 22 package managers | Same | No |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | No |
| Autofix on components | No | No | No |
| Containers | 4 distributions | Same | No |
| **Source SAST ** (languages) | 12 | Same | No |
| **Source SAST ** (frameworks) | 22 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | No |
| IaC | 6Â | 4Â | No |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary | Same | No |
| DAST | 7 attack surface types | Same | Yes. No information available |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs | No |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| CSPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| ASM | No | No | No |
| Secrets | 15 secrets types | Same , plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | No |
| AI | 3 functions , 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 1 function in common |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| Open-source | MPL-2.0 license , totally equivalent to the paid version | Not applicable | No |
| Provisioning as code | Yes | Yes | No |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS (no tenancy information) |
| Regions | US | Same | No information available |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 4 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Inspectiv |
| 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 | Same | None |
| SCA | Native | Same | None |
| Container | Native | Same | None |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | Native |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Cloud | 3 | Same | None |
| CSPM | Native | Same | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | None |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | None |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
Tip
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 15, 2025. The primary source of information was inspectiv.com, which was supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
**More like Inspectiv **
Tip
Free trialSearch 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 .
Last updated on