Jit
Last updated: Mar 25, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Jit'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 | Jit |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | Native ASPM with external scanners |
| Extras | None | None | None |
| Headcount | 157 | Same | 154 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 40%, IT 14%, sales 15%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 25% | Same | Engineering 16%, IT 4%, sales 7%, marketing 5%, operations 10% and others 58% |
| Headcount growth | +14%, +15%, -1% | Same | +14%, +26%, +51% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | US |
| Countries | AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | BD, IL, IN and US |
| Reputation | 9.76 from 228 reviews over 8 years on Gartner and Clutch | Same | 9.94 from 52 reviews over 2 years on Capterra, G2 and Gartner |
| Followers | 22K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 6K based on the following: Facebook, LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2021 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $38.5M USD in 1 round from 5 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 1M to 8M |
| CVEs as CNA Researcher | 289 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 | SOC 2 Type II |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 27K per month. Top 3: 34% PE, 33% CO, 6% CL. Others 27% | Same | 47K per month. Top 3: 18% US, 13% ID, 8% IN. Others 61% |
| Authority | 31 out of 100 | Same | 34 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, documentation and webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections, 3 in common and 10 additional | Same | 9 documentation sections, 3 in common and 6 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 or with any of its partners |
| Marketplaces | AWS | Same | AWS, GCP and GitHub |
| Freemium | No | No | Yes |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | 14-day free trial |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | No |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales and marketplaces |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | 2 plans (growth, enterprise). First transparent |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | Annually |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | Monthly |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM, binary SAST, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: AI SAST, API security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR | ASPM, Containers, CSPM, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets |
| Minimum scope | 1 author | Same | 5 developers |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Developers |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Jit |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | None | Continuous zero-day vulnerability research | None |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | Availability |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | 99.5% per month |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | No |
| Accreditations | CNA and Penetration Testing by CREST | Same | Security ISV Competency |
| Pentester certifications | Not applicable | 202 from 59 different types | Not applicable |
| Type of contract | Employee | Same | Employee or freelance |
| Endpoint control | No | Total | Not applicable |
| Channel control | No | Total | Not applicable |
| Standards | Some requirements from 78 standards, 12 in common and 66 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 16 standards, 12 in common and 4 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, Automated tools and human intelligence | Automated tools |
| Remediation | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 | 3, 2 in common and 1 additional |
| Output | 5, 3 in common and 2 additional | Same, plus 2 | 4, 3 in common and 1 additional |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Jit |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | REST with JSON |
| IDE | 5 functionalities, 3 in common and 2 additional | Same, plus 1 functionality | 4 functionalities, 3 in common and 1 additional |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Breaks the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 4 sources | Same | 3 sources, 2 in common and 1 additional |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS and KEV | Same | CVSS |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | Risk score |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | External (Trivy for Containers; AWS Security Hub and Prowler for CSPM; ZAP for DAST; KICS and Kubescape for IaC; GoSec and Semgrep for SAST; Grype and Syft for SBOM; OSV, Nancy, NPM-Audit and OSV for SCA; GitLeaks and TruffleHog for Secrets) |
| SCA | 19 package managers, 9 in common and 10 additional | Same | 10 package managers, 9 in common and 1 additional |
| AI security | No | Yes | No |
| Reachability | 12 languages | Same | Yes. No information available |
| Reachability type | Deterministic | Same | Deterministic |
| SBOM | 22 package managers, 12 in common and 10 additional | Same | 24 package managers, 12 in common and 12 additional |
| Malware detection | Yes | Yes | No |
| Autofix on components | No | No | Yes |
| Source SAST (languages) | 12, 11 in common and 1 additional | Same | 14, 11 in common and 3 additional |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 22 | Same | Yes. No information available |
| Custom rules | No | No | SAST |
| IaC | 6, 2 in common and 4 additional | 4 | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional |
| Binary SAST | 1 type of binary | Same, plus 2 types of binaries | No |
| DAST | 7 attack surface types, 3 in common and 4 additional | Same | 3 attack surface types, all in common |
| API security testing | No | 4 types of APIs, 3 in common and 1 additional | 3 types of APIs, all in common |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| ASM | No | No | No |
| Secrets | 15 secrets types, 3 in common and 12 additional | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | 5 secret types, 3 in common and 2 additional |
| AI | 4 functions, 2 in common and 2 additional | Same | 2 functions, all in common |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open-source | MPL-2 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 | US |
| Status | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Incidents | 4 per year | Same | 0.3 per year |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Jit |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6, 4 in common and 2 additional | Same | 4, all in common |
| Binary repositories | None | None | None |
| Ticketing | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 4, 1 in common and 3 additional |
| ChatOps | None | None | 2 |
| IDE | 3, all in common | Same | 3, all in common |
| CI/CD | 21, 4 in common and 17 additional | Same | 4, all in common |
| SCA | Native | Same | Native powered by Nancy, NPM-Audit and OSV |
| SAST | Native | Same | Native powered by GoSec and Semgrep |
| DAST | Native | Same | Native powered by ZAP |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | Native powered by GitLeaks and TruffleHog |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | Native |
| Compliance | None | None | 1 |
The latest update to this comparison was on Mar 17, 2026. The primary sources of information were jit.io and docs.jit.io, which were supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Jit
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
apiautofixaspmcomparedastiacmcpsastsbomscasecretsreachability