Mindgard
Last updated: Mar 25, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Mindgard'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 | Mindgard |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI Security |
| Extras | None | None | None |
| Headcount | 157 | Same | 28 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 40%, IT 14%, sales 15%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 25% | Same | Engineering 46%, IT 4%, marketing 4%, operations 4% and others 42% |
| Headcount growth | +14%, +15%, -1% | Same | +22%, +56%, +133% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | UK |
| Countries | AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | UK and US |
| Reputation | 9.76 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 | 3K based on the following: LinkedIn, X and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | IDC |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2022 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $3.8M USD in 1 round from 3 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 1M to 10M |
| 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 | None |
| Bug bounty | Yes | Yes | No |
| Visits | 27K per month. Top 3: 34% PE, 33% CO, 6% CL. Others 27% | Same | 19K per month. Top 3: 28% AU, 25% US, 11% UK. Others 36% |
| Authority | 31 out of 100 | Same | 29 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, reports and webinars |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections, 2 in common and 11 additional | Same | 4 documentation sections, 2 in common and 2 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 | Free-trial and 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 | No information available |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | No information available |
| Minimum capabilities | ASPM, binary SAST, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and secrets | Same plus: AI SAST, API security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR | AI Security |
| Minimum scope | 1 author | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | No information available |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | No information available |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No information available |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Mindgard |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | No information available |
| Minimum availability | 99.95% per year | Same | No information available |
| After-sale guarantees | No | Yes | No |
| Accreditations | CNA and Penetration Testing by CREST | Same | None |
| 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 67 standards, 8 in common and 59 additional | All requirements from the same standards, 8 in common and 59 additional | 10 standards, 8 in common and 2 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, Automated tools and human intelligence | Automated tools and AI |
| Remediation | 5, 2 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 | 2, all in common |
| Output | 5, 1 in common and 4 additional | Same, plus 2 | 2, 1 in common and 1 additional |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Mindgard |
|---|---|---|---|
| ASPM | Yes | Yes | No |
| API | GraphQL with JSON | Same | Yes. No information available |
| IDE | 5 functionalities | Same, plus 1 functionality | No |
| CLI | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| CI/CD | Breaks the build | Same | Breaks the build |
| Vulnerability sources | 4 sources | Same | No information available |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS and KEV | Same | No information available |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house |
| SCA | 19 package managers | Same | No |
| AI security | No | Yes | Yes |
| 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 |
| Source SAST (languages) | 12 | Same | No |
| Source SAST (frameworks) | 22 | Same | No |
| Custom rules | No | No | No |
| IaC | 6 | 4 | 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 | Yes. No information available |
| IAST | No | No | No |
| ASM | No | No | No |
| Secrets | 15 secrets types | Same, plus verify other attack vectors and secrets exploitability | No |
| AI | 4 functions, 2 in common and 2 additional | Same | 4 functions, 2 in common and 2 additional |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | No |
| 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 | No information available |
| Status | Yes | Yes | No |
| Incidents | 4 per year | Same | No information available |
Integrations
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Mindgard |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6 | Same | None |
| Binary repositories | None | None | None |
| Ticketing | 3, 1 in common and 2 additional | Same | 1 in common |
| ChatOps | None | None | None |
| IDE | 3 | Same | None |
| CI/CD | 21, 1 in common and 20 additional | Same | 1 in common |
| SCA | Native | Same | None |
| SAST | Native | Same | None |
| DAST | Native | Same | None |
| IAST | None | None | None |
| Secrets | Native | Same | None |
| 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 Mar 17, 2026. The primary sources of information were mindgard.ai and docs.mindgard.ai, which were supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Mindgard
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
aisecurityapicomparethreat-modeling