Software composition analysis · November 2026 Edition
OWASP Dependency-Check vs Mend.io – Mend SCA
Zero of fourteen models named OWASP Dependency-Check first on the direct prompt; three named Mend.io – Mend SCA. Both were named by all fourteen models and OWASP Dependency-Check carries 37 labels and Mend.io – Mend SCA 41, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in two categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share10%6%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate51%15%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#3#5A position in a field of 19; printed, not drawn.
Labels3741A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, OWASP Dependency-Check 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 OWASP Dependency-Check · Snyk Open Source vs Mend.io – Mend SCA · Trivy vs OWASP Dependency-Check
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.
OWASP Dependency-CheckFirst choices, of fourteen modelsMend.io – Mend SCA
Direct031 against Mend.io – Mend SCA
Paraphrase105 against OWASP Dependency-Check
Comparative014 against OWASP Dependency-Check
Budget-constrained401 against OWASP Dependency-Check
Scale-constrained00
Negative009 against OWASP Dependency-Check · 4 against Mend.io – Mend SCA
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, OWASP Dependency-Check and Mend.io – Mend SCA were named in the same answer thirty-seven times, of the 106 answers naming OWASP Dependency-Check and the 117 naming Mend.io – Mend SCA. In those answers Mend.io – Mend SCA took the first choice one time and OWASP Dependency-Check three.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where OWASP Dependency-Check and Mend.io – Mend SCA 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 | | | | | |
OWASP Dependency-Check Mend.io – Mend SCA first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, OWASP Dependency-Check on the left and Mend.io – Mend SCA on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where OWASP Dependency-Check and Mend.io – Mend SCA stood in it.
Mend.io – Mend SCA first, OWASP Dependency-Check not the choice
3 of 14 modelsOWASP Dependency-Check was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.Claude Haiku 4.5Mend.io – Mend SCA alternatives: Aikido Security, Snyk Open Source
Perplexity SonarMend.io – Mend SCA alternatives: Endor Labs, Snyk Open Source
MiniMax M2.5Mend.io – Mend SCA, Snyk Open Source alternatives: Sonatype Lifecycle
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.GPT-5.4 miniSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA, OWASP Dependency-Check, OWASP Dependency-Track, Semgrep
Gemini 3.5 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub Advanced Security, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Semgrep Supply Chain, Socket
Grok 4.20Snyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
DeepSeek V4 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
Qwen 3.7 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Safeguard SCA, Trivy
GLM 4.7 FlashXSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io – Mend SCA
GPT-6 LunaSnyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub Code Security, GitHub Dependabot, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
Muse Glimmer 30BSnyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Mend.io – Mend SCA, Sonatype Lifecycle
Neither was named
3 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Mistral SmallSnyk Open Source alternatives: FOSSA, Trivy
Llama 4 MaverickSnyk Open Source alternatives: Endor Labs, FOSSA, Safeguard SCA, Semgrep Supply Chain, Socket
Kimi K2Aikido Security, Snyk Open Source alternatives: FOSSA, GitHub Advanced Security
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
OWASP Dependency-Check leads by nineteen points.
OWASP Dependency-Check19%#3 of 14Mend.io – Mend SCA0%#12 of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
OWASP Dependency-Check leads by four points.
OWASP Dependency-Check10%#3 of 19Mend.io – Mend SCA6%#5 of 19Enterprise
The order flips: Mend.io – Mend SCA leads at enterprise.
Mend.io – Mend SCA7%#4 of 14OWASP Dependency-Check2%#10 of 14What the models said about OWASP Dependency-Check
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“generally not recommended for modern pipelines due to high false-positive rates and slow build times” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · hard negative
“OWASP Dependency-Check as your sole scanner: It's an actively maintained project, not one I'd dismiss. But its approach relies in part on matching components to vulnerability records” GPT-6 Luna · negative prompt · soft negative
“it is commonly used with caution because it is CPE and metadata driven, has historically high false-positive rates, lacks built-in reachability / exploitability prioritization” Muse Glimmer 30B · negative prompt · soft negative
“For budget-conscious teams or open-source projects, OWASP Dependency-Check is recommended” Claude Haiku 4.5 · budget prompt · first choice
“Primary SCA: OWASP Dependency-Check (free, comprehensive scanning)” Kimi K2 · budget prompt · first choice
“I'd suggest OWASP Dependency-Check as your primary tool” Claude Haiku 4.5 · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Mend.io – Mend SCA
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Mend.io: Powerful but historically complex to configure and priced for enterprise” Kimi K2 · direct prompt · hard negative
“Use with Caution (For High-Volume Repositories) ... historically, it has struggled with accuracy and performance in very large codebases.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Most mainstream tools (Snyk, Black Duck, Dependabot, Whitesource/Mend, etc.) fall into this category to some degree.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“For most mid-market B2B companies, Mend.io or Snyk would be the primary recommendations” MiniMax M2.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Mend.io stands out as the leading choice for many mid-market organizations.” Claude Haiku 4.5 · direct prompt · first choice
“Mend.io (best for automated remediation and proactive SCA)” Claude Haiku 4.5 · comparative prompt · first choice
Also compared
Snyk Open Source vs OWASP Dependency-CheckSnyk Open Source vs Mend.io – Mend SCATrivy vs OWASP Dependency-CheckTrivy vs Mend.io – Mend SCAOWASP Dependency-Check vs GitHub DependabotOWASP Dependency-Check vs OWASP Dependency-TrackGitHub Dependabot vs Mend.io – Mend SCAMend.io – Mend SCA vs OWASP Dependency-TrackAll fifteen head-to-head pages and the full SCA 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.