Index › IT › Developer platform › Secure code training › Security Journey vs OWASP Secure Coding Dojo
Secure code training · November 2026 Edition
Security Journey vs OWASP Secure Coding Dojo
Zero of fourteen models named Security Journey first on the direct prompt; zero named OWASP Secure Coding Dojo. Security Journey was named by eleven of the fourteen models and OWASP Secure Coding Dojo by nine and Security Journey carries 32 labels and OWASP Secure Coding Dojo 14, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share2%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate16%7%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#5#7A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels3214A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Security Journey reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform vs Security Journey · Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform vs OWASP Secure Coding Dojo · SecureFlag vs Security Journey
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the secure code training page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Security JourneyFirst choices, of fourteen modelsOWASP Secure Coding Dojo
Direct00
Paraphrase10
Comparative101 against Security Journey · 1 against OWASP Secure Coding Dojo
Budget-constrained011 against Security Journey
Scale-constrained00
Negative003 against Security Journey
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Security Journey and OWASP Secure Coding Dojo stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | ||||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | ||||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | ||||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | ||||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | | | |||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | ||||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | |||||
| Kimi K2 | | | ||||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | ||||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
Security Journey OWASP Secure Coding Dojo first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Security Journey on the left and OWASP Secure Coding Dojo on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Security Journey and OWASP Secure Coding Dojo stood in it.
Neither was the first choice, one was named
8 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Gemini 3.5 FlashSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: AppSecEngineer, Checkmarx Codebashing, Kontra, SecureFlag, Security Journey
Grok 4.20Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: SecureFlag, Security Journey, Snyk Learn
Mistral SmallSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: SecureFlag, Security Journey
DeepSeek V4 FlashSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: SecureFlag, Security Journey
Kimi K2Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: Avatao, Immersive Labs, Security Journey
GLM 4.7 FlashXSecureFlag alternatives: AppSecEngineer, Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform, Security Journey
MiniMax M2.5Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: SafeStack Academy, Security Journey
GPT-6 LunaSecureFlag alternatives: Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform, Security Journey
Neither was named
6 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Claude Haiku 4.5Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: AppSecEngineer, Avatao, SecureFlag
GPT-5.4 miniSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: AppSec Education Platform, Avatao, SafeStack Academy, SecureFlag
Perplexity SonarSecureFlag alternatives: Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform
Llama 4 MaverickSecureFlag alternatives: Avatao, ImmersiveLabs, KnowBe4, Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform, Veracode Security Labs
Qwen 3.7 FlashSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: Hack The Box Academy, Pluralsight
Muse Glimmer 30BSecure Code Warrior Learning Platform alternatives: Checkmarx Codebashing, SafeStack Academy
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Security Journey leads by five points.
Security Journey5%#5 of 11OWASP Secure Coding Dojo0%#– of 11Mid-marketThe figures above
Level: the same share of first choices.
Security Journey2%#5 of 13OWASP Secure Coding Dojo2%#7 of 13Enterprise
Security Journey leads by ten points.
Security Journey10%#3 of 7OWASP Secure Coding Dojo0%#– of 7What the models said about Security Journey
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“often compared unfavorably to competitors in evaluations... Video-heavy content that some users feel lacks depth and interactivity” MiniMax M2.5 · negative prompt · soft negative
“often more expensive and formal, suitable for organizations that prefer traditional e-learning structures over hands-on labs” Qwen 3.7 Flash · comparative prompt · soft negative
“Security Journey offers Mid-Cost training, but a Mid-Cost solution might not be the best fit for you.” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · soft negative
“Start with Secure Code Warrior or Security Journey for a structured enterprise program” GPT-6 Luna · comparative prompt · first choice
“or Security Journey (for budget flexibility)” MiniMax M2.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“a stronger structured option for small organizations, with role-based paths and compliance-oriented reporting, but pricing should be confirmed directly” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · alternative
What the models said about OWASP Secure Coding Dojo
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“often recommended as supplements for practical labs but aren't full commercial platforms” Grok 4.20 · comparative prompt · soft negative
“Zero budget, hands-on: OWASP Secure Coding Dojo + Secure Code Game. Both are free to self-host and run internally” Muse Glimmer 30B · budget prompt · first choice
“If you need a zero-cost, self-hosted option and can spare staff time to run it, OWASP's Secure Coding Dojo is free software” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · alternative
“For a low-cost start, combine the OWASP Secure Coding Dojo with PortSwigger's free interactive Web Security Academy” GPT-6 Luna · paraphrase prompt · alternative
Also compared
Secure Code Warrior Learning Platform vs Security JourneySecure Code Warrior Learning Platform vs OWASP Secure Coding DojoSecureFlag vs Security JourneySecureFlag vs OWASP Secure Coding DojoSnyk Learn vs Security JourneySnyk Learn vs OWASP Secure Coding DojoSafeStack Academy vs Security JourneySafeStack Academy vs OWASP Secure Coding DojoSecurity Journey vs AppSecEngineerSecurity Journey vs Veracode Security LabsAppSecEngineer vs OWASP Secure Coding DojoOWASP Secure Coding Dojo vs Veracode Security LabsAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full secure code training standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.