Index › IT › Developer platform › SCA › GitHub Dependabot vs OWASP Dependency-Track
Software composition analysis · November 2026 Edition

GitHub Dependabot vs OWASP Dependency-Track

Zero of fourteen models named GitHub Dependabot first on the direct prompt; zero named OWASP Dependency-Track. GitHub Dependabot was named by twelve of the fourteen models and OWASP Dependency-Track by twelve and GitHub Dependabot carries 25 labels and OWASP Dependency-Track 21, so the shares are not directly comparable.

GitHub Dependabot

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

OWASP Dependency-Track

accepted challenger

Named in one category this edition.

First-choice share8%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate24%5%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#6A position in a field of 19; printed, not drawn.
Labels2521A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, GitHub Dependabot reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Snyk Open Source was named alongside these two in fourteen of the fourteen direct answers. Snyk Open Source vs GitHub Dependabot · Snyk Open Source vs OWASP Dependency-Track · Trivy vs GitHub Dependabot

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 software composition analysis page.

By framing

How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
GitHub DependabotFirst choices, of fourteen modelsOWASP Dependency-Track
Direct001 against GitHub Dependabot
Paraphrase021 against GitHub Dependabot
Comparative001 against GitHub Dependabot
Budget-constrained411 against OWASP Dependency-Track
Scale-constrained00
Negative003 against GitHub Dependabot
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.

Across every category in the November 2026 Edition, GitHub Dependabot and OWASP Dependency-Track were named in the same answer twenty times, of the 61 answers naming GitHub Dependabot and the 68 naming OWASP Dependency-Track. In those answers OWASP Dependency-Track took the first choice two times and GitHub Dependabot two.

Every model, every framing

The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where GitHub Dependabot and OWASP Dependency-Track stood in it.
ModelDirectParaphraseComparativeBudget-constrainedScale-constrainedNegative
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
GitHub Dependabot OWASP Dependency-Track first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, GitHub Dependabot on the left and OWASP Dependency-Track on the right.

The direct prompt

The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where GitHub Dependabot and OWASP Dependency-Track stood in it.

Neither was the first choice, one was named

2 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.
GPT-5.4 miniSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA, OWASP Dependency-Check, OWASP Dependency-Track, Semgrep
GPT-6 LunaSnyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub Code Security, GitHub Dependabot, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle

Neither was named

12 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.
Claude Haiku 4.5Mend.io – Mend SCA alternatives: Aikido Security, Snyk Open Source
Gemini 3.5 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub Advanced Security, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Semgrep Supply Chain, Socket
Perplexity SonarMend.io – Mend SCA alternatives: Endor Labs, Snyk Open Source
Grok 4.20Snyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
Mistral SmallSnyk Open Source alternatives: FOSSA, Trivy
DeepSeek V4 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
Llama 4 MaverickSnyk Open Source alternatives: Endor Labs, FOSSA, Safeguard SCA, Semgrep Supply Chain, Socket
Qwen 3.7 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Safeguard SCA, Trivy
Kimi K2Aikido Security, Snyk Open Source alternatives: FOSSA, GitHub Advanced Security
GLM 4.7 FlashXSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA
MiniMax M2.5Mend.io – Mend SCA, Snyk Open Source alternatives: Sonatype Lifecycle
Muse Glimmer 30BSnyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle

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
GitHub Dependabot leads by two points.
GitHub Dependabot4%#5 of 14
OWASP Dependency-Track2%#6 of 14
The full small business standing →
Mid-marketThe figures above
GitHub Dependabot leads by two points.
GitHub Dependabot8%#4 of 19
OWASP Dependency-Track6%#6 of 19
The full mid-market standing →
Enterprise
The order flips: OWASP Dependency-Track leads at enterprise.
OWASP Dependency-Track17%#3 of 14
GitHub Dependabot0%#– of 14
The full enterprise standing →

What the models said about GitHub Dependabot

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.

“GitHub Dependabot as your entire SCA program: It can be useful for repositories on GitHub, but check the documented ecosystem and file-format coverage” GPT-6 Luna · negative prompt · soft negative
“May be insufficient as a standalone program for complex SBOM, license, or multi-repository governance” Perplexity Sonar · direct prompt · soft negative
“Dependabot is convenient if you're all-in on GitHub, but it's more of an updater than a deep scanner.” Grok 4.20 · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“Using GitHub and want zero setup effort | GitHub Dependabot | Free, native, automatically creates fix PRs.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · first choice
“Best value for most budget-conscious companies: GitHub Dependabot—if your code is already on GitHub.” GPT-6 Luna · budget prompt · first choice
“GitHub Dependabot or Snyk Open Source are the best starting points due to their free tiers” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice

What the models said about OWASP Dependency-Track

Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.

“Free and open source, but requires internal hosting and maintenance.” Perplexity Sonar · budget prompt · soft negative
“my default recommendation would be OWASP Dependency-Track” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Primary Recommendation: OWASP Dependency-Track” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Start with OWASP Dependency-Track + Trivy.” GPT-5.4 mini · budget prompt · first choice
Also compared

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.