Seal Security
Last updated: Sep 10, 2026
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Seal Security'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 | Seal Security |
|---|---|---|---|
| Focus | Native ASPM with in-house scanners | AI-powered PTaaS on top of native ASPM with in-house scanners | Vulnerability remediation and patch management |
| Extras | None | None | None |
| Headcount | 186 | Same | 114 |
| Headcount distribution | Engineering 42%, IT 12%, sales 16%, marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 24% | Same | Engineering 15%, IT 5%, sales 6%, operations 3% and others 71% |
| Headcount growth | +3%, +21%, +29% | Same | -1%, +2%, +65% |
| Headquarters | CO and US | Same | IL and US |
| Countries | AR, BO, BR, CL, CO, CR, DO, EC, MX, PA, PE and US | Same | IL, US and ZA |
| Reputation | 9.27 from 388 reviews over 7 years on Clutch, G2 and Gartner | Same | 7.43 from 4 reviews over 1 year on G2 |
| Followers | 23K based on the following: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube | Same | 4K based on the following: LinkedIn and YouTube |
| Research firms | None | None | None |
| Founded | 2001 | Same | 2022 |
| Funding | Bootstrapped | Same | $20.4M USD in 3 rounds from 6 investors |
| Acquisitions | None | None | None |
| Revenue | 10M to 15M | Same | 7M to 18M |
| Third-Party CVEs Discovered | 289 CVEs reported to MITRE, ranked in the top 10 CVE labs worldwide | Same | 5 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 | ISO/IEC 27001 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 | 6K per month. Top 3: 50% US, 45% IN, 4% IL. Others 1% |
| Authority | 33 out of 100 | Same | 28 out of 100 |
| Public vulnerability DB | Discovered and third-party | Same | Discovered and third-party |
| Content | Blog, documentation, e-books, glossary, reports, success stories, videos, webinars and white papers | Same | Blog, brochures, case studies, documentation, FAQs, news, updates, webinars and white papers |
| Comprehensive documentation | 13 documentation sections, 7 in common and 6 additional | Same | 7 documentation sections, all in common |
| 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 and GitHub |
| Freemium | No | No | No |
| Free trial | 21-day free trial | PoV | PoV |
| Demo | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open demo | No | No | Yes |
| Pricing | Contact sales and marketplace | Contact sales | Contact sales and marketplace |
| Pricing tiers | 1 plan | 1 plan | 3 plans (Starter, Business, Scale). None transparent |
| Minimum term | Monthly | Monthly | Annually |
| Minimum payment period | Monthly | Monthly | Annually |
| 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 | Containers and SCA |
| Minimum scope | 1 author | Same | No information available |
| Pricing drivers | Authors | Same | Targets |
| Free implementation | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Free support | Yes | Yes | No |
Service
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Seal Security |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 powered by AI |
| SLA | Availability | Accuracy, availability and response | Response |
| 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 information available |
| Channel control | No | Total | No information available |
| Standards | Some requirements from 67 standards, 6 in common and 61 additional | All requirements from the same standards | 8 standards, 6 in common and 2 additional |
| Detection method | Automated tools | AI, automated tools and human intelligence | AI and automated tools |
| Remediation | 5, 3 in common and 2 additional | Same, plus 1 | 3, all in common |
| Output | 5, 3 in common and 2 additional | Same, plus 2 | 5, 3 in common and 2 additional |
Product
| Attribute | Essential | Advanced | Seal Security |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 | 3 sources, all in common |
| Threat model alignment | Yes | Yes | No |
| Priority criteria | CVSS v4.0, CVSSF, EPSS, Fixing cost, KEV, Transitivity and Use | Same | CVSS and KEV |
| Custom prioritization | Priority score | Same | No |
| Scanner origin | In-house | In-house | In-house |
| SCA | 19 package managers, 11 in common and 8 additional | Same | 11 package managers, all in common |
| 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 | Yes |
| 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 | 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, 1 in common and 3 additional | Same, plus 1 function | 6 functions, 1 in common and 5 additional |
| AI SAST | No | Yes | No |
| MCP | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Open-source | No | No | No |
| Deployment | SaaS (multi-tenant) | Same | SaaS (no tenancy information) + on-premise (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 | Seal Security |
|---|---|---|---|
| SCM | 6, 3 in common and 3 additional | Same | 3, all in common |
| Binary repositories | None | None | 1 |
| Ticketing | 3 | Same | None |
| ChatOps | None | None | 1 |
| IDE | 3 | Same | None |
| CI/CD | 21, 5 in common and 16 additional | Same | 5, 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 | None |
| Remediation | None | None | None |
| Bug bounty | None | None | None |
| Vulnerability management | None | None | 10 |
| Compliance | None | None | None |
The latest update to this comparison was on 2026-09-10. The primary sources of information were seal.security and docs.sealsecurity.io, which were supplemented by specialized information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
More like Seal Security
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
autofixcomparecontainersmalwaremcpsbomsca