Static application security testing for small business buyers
Asked as “SAST tool”, and as “static code security scanner”, on behalf of a small B2B company. 57 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, fourteen models each.
Standing · first-choice share
53%
Clear leader
53Semgrep AppSec Platform14SonarQube11Snyk Code23others
53% of first choices, clear leader.
Since September 2026▼−20Since September 2026: 70% → 50%, −20 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.Semgrep AppSec Platform held the lead, −20 points on 70%, past the floor.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment; they sit side by side and are never added together.
Small businessSemgrep AppSec Platform53%Clear leader▼−20Since September 2026: 70% → 50%, −20 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.This pageMid-marketSemgrep AppSec Platform36%Contested▼−17Since September 2026: 47% → 30%, −17 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →Enterprise
Checkmarx One54%Clear leader▼−3Since September 2026: 54% → 51%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →
Checkmarx One54%Clear leader▼−3Since September 2026: 54% → 51%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.Standing →The standing
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, over all fourteen models, for a small B2B company. Ordered by share.
ProductFirst-choice shareNegative rateLabelsQuadrantSince September 2026
01Semgrep AppSec Platform53%0%70endorsed leader▼−20Since September 2026: 70% → 50%, −20 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.70% → 50%
02SonarQube14%11%70accepted challenger▲+10Since September 2026: 2% → 12%, +10 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 12%
03
Snyk Code11%2%44accepted challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 9% → 12%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 12%
Snyk Code11%2%44accepted challenger▲+3Since September 2026: 9% → 12%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 12%04
Snyk9%0%15accepted challenger▲+6Since September 2026: 4% → 10%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 10%
Snyk9%0%15accepted challenger▲+6Since September 2026: 4% → 10%, +6 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.4% → 10%05
Aikido Security5%4%24accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 9% → 6%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 6%
Aikido Security5%4%24accepted challenger▼−3Since September 2026: 9% → 6%, −3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.9% → 6%06
GitHub Advanced Security2%5%20accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%
GitHub Advanced Security2%5%20accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 2%07
CodeAnt AI2%8%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%
CodeAnt AI2%8%12accepted challenger▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 2%Show the six products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
11
OpenText Fortify0%94%17criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
OpenText Fortify0%94%17criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%12
Veracode Static Analysis0%86%35criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Veracode Static Analysis0%86%35criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%13Checkmarx One0%80%41criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
Checkmarx One0%80%41criticized challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%08CodeQL0%19%26accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
10Bandit0%8%12accepted challenger=heldSince September 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.0% → 0%
09
DeepSource0%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%
DeepSource0%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since September 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.2% → 0%The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one can't be told apart from repeat variation, and both are shown. Each index measures its own floor from its own repeat, over its own categories, so the floor differs from one index to the next. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured
Bars are the share of first choices, 0 to 100Every product with at least 10 labels here. Every product name links to its product page.
Head to head
Semgrep AppSec Platform vs SonarQubeSemgrep AppSec Platform vs Snyk CodeSemgrep AppSec Platform vs Snyk
Head-to-head pages are published for mid-market buyers, so these open on mid-market figures, not small business.All twenty-eight head-to-head pages: the top eight products, each against each
Semgrep AppSec Platform vs CodeQLSemgrep AppSec Platform vs GitHub Advanced SecuritySemgrep AppSec Platform vs Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platform vs Checkmarx OneSonarQube vs Snyk CodeSonarQube vs SnykSonarQube vs CodeQLSonarQube vs GitHub Advanced SecuritySonarQube vs Veracode Static AnalysisSonarQube vs Checkmarx OneSnyk Code vs SnykSnyk Code vs CodeQLSnyk Code vs GitHub Advanced SecuritySnyk Code vs Veracode Static AnalysisSnyk Code vs Checkmarx OneSnyk vs CodeQLSnyk vs GitHub Advanced SecuritySnyk vs Veracode Static AnalysisSnyk vs Checkmarx OneCodeQL vs GitHub Advanced SecurityCodeQL vs Veracode Static AnalysisCodeQL vs Checkmarx OneGitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode Static AnalysisGitHub Advanced Security vs Checkmarx OneVeracode Static Analysis vs Checkmarx One
Recommended versus criticized
Every product with at least 10 labels here, on both axes. The 30% line names a quadrant, not the verdict above: that one needs more than 40%.
Criticized challengerCriticized default
Negative label rate →
S01
S02
0304050607C08
09B10
111213Accepted challengerEndorsed leader
0%First-choice share → · lines at 30% share and 25% negative70%
Key
01Semgrep AppSec Platform53%
02SonarQube14%
03Snyk Code11%
Snyk Code11%04Snyk9%
Snyk9%05Aikido Security5%
Aikido Security5%06GitHub Advanced Security2%
GitHub Advanced Security2%07CodeAnt AI2%
CodeAnt AI2%08CodeQL0%
09DeepSource0%
DeepSource0%10Bandit0%
11OpenText Fortify0%
OpenText Fortify0%12Veracode Static Analysis0%
Veracode Static Analysis0%13Checkmarx One0%
Checkmarx One0%What they warned about
Three of fourteen models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Haiku 4.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash, Perplexity Sonar, Grok 4.20, Mistral Small, Llama 4 Maverick, Qwen 3.7 Flash, Kimi K2, GLM 4.7 FlashX, MiniMax M2.5 and Muse Glimmer 30B changed. A high negative share on a product with few labels is a warning. A low share on a product with many labels is salience, not sentiment.
Checkmarx One80%
33 of 41 labels negative · 13 of 14 models · 19 hard negative
“the clearest “avoid or be cautious” signals point to Checkmarx... described as expensive, complex to implement, and often too heavy for small teams” Perplexity Sonar, negative prompt
Veracode Static Analysis86%
30 of 35 labels negative · 13 of 14 models · 17 hard negative
“Typically sold via long sales cycles and annual contracts, with complex workflows and no transparent pricing. Not ideal for small teams” Mistral Small, negative prompt
OpenText Fortify94%
16 of 17 labels negative · 11 of 14 models · 12 hard negative
“Enterprise suites (Checkmarx, Veracode, Fortify) – typically require $40K+ annual contracts and dedicated security staff” Kimi K2, scale prompt
Black Duck Coverity100%
7 of 7 labels negative · 7 of 14 models · 5 hard negative
“Usually no. Checkmarx One, Veracode, Coverity, and Fortify are priced and built for organizations with dedicated security teams” Muse Glimmer 30B, negative prompt
What they cite
Fourteen of the fourteen models returned a source list in this edition: five return the pages they cited and nine the search results they consulted.
Sites the answers cite
73 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 14 of 14 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 947 links across 158 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. 16 of the 252 answers across every segment cited this index's own page for the category; the method page measures whether that reading tilts an answer.
51 answers · 98 citations · 12 models
39 answers · 48 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Checkmarx36 answers · 47 citations · 12 models
27 answers · 37 citations · 12 models
vendor site · Safeguard26 answers · 31 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Aikido24 answers · 34 citations · 11 models
vendor site · G223 answers · 28 citations · 11 models
vendor site · Jit19 answers · 19 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Opsera17 answers · 17 citations · 8 models
16 answers · 17 citations · 8 models
vendor site · OX16 answers · 16 citations · 8 models
vendor site · Corgea15 answers · 19 citations · 8 models
Pages the answers cite
The ten pages named in the most answers, by full address. A page here is one the models returned with a recommendation, not one the index endorses.
43 answers · 11 models
34 answers · 11 models
27 answers · 10 models
23 answers · 8 models
19 answers · 9 models
18 answers · 9 models
17 answers · 8 models
16 answers · 8 models
16 answers · 8 models
14 answers · 11 models
Search against answers
Each company's standing in the answers beside its site's footprint in Google search, one row a site: the products the models named on it with their shares, and the share they add up to; monthly searches on Google, and DataForSEO's estimate of AI search demand (modeled from search signals, directional, not a count of queries to any assistant), for the most-searched of the company's and its products' names (the name is in each row's hover text); estimated monthly organic visits to the site; and its best position in Google's top ten for “best sast tool”, “sast tool”, “sast tools”. US estimates from DataForSEO and Google's Ads Transparency Center. A small company's site, or a mid-sized company's site for its flagship, is marked company; a product on a large parent's site (Google, Microsoft) has no site figures. A column with no figures for this category is left out, and an empty cell means none were seen, not none exist. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
| Company and products | Share | Own site cited | Name searches, Google | AI search demand, est. | Organic visits | Paid search a month, est. | Google ads, last 30 days |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Semgrep AppSec Platform semgrep.dev | 53% | 167 | 3,461 | 43 | |||
| Snyk snyk.io Snyk Code 11%, Snyk 9% | 19% | 150 | 12,100 | 581 | 61,651 company | 60 | |
| SonarQube | 14% | 14,800 | 1,353 | ||||
| Aikido aikido.dev Aikido Security 5% | 5% | 326 | 2,400 | 51 | 6,442 company | $936 | 120 |
| GitHub parent site GitHub Advanced Security 2% | 2% | 78 | 1,500,000 | 31,479 | |||
| CodeAnt AI codeant.ai | 2% | 18 | 260 | 9 | 2,282 | $472 | 56 |
| Codiga codiga.io | 2% | ||||||
| GitHub Code Scanning with CodeQL | 2% | ||||||
| Semgrep's free AppSec Platform tier | 2% | ||||||
| CodeQL | 0% | 2,900 | 81 |
Google's top ten for the three searches hold 24 sites; 2 of them are among the sites the models cited here (checkmarx.com, safeguard.sh). The first result for “best sast tool” is reddit.com.
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.ShowHide
How they answered
Six framings of the same buying question, each sent to every model in a fresh session with search on. One row per model, so a row shows whether it held its answer under rewording, what it named when cost was the constraint, and what it argued against. Computed from the raw judge labels.
ShowHideModelDirect“What is the best SAST tool for a small B2B company?”Paraphrase“Which static code security scanner would you recommend to a small business that sells to other businesses?”Comparative“What are the top SAST tools for a small team and how do they differ?”Budget-constrained“What is the best SAST tool for a small company with a tight budget?”Scale-constrained“We are a 30 person company evaluating a SAST tool. What should we look at?”Negative“Which SAST tools should a small business avoid or be cautious about?”
Claude Haiku 4.5no first choiceagainst: Checkmarx OneSnyk, SonarQubeChangedSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeno first choiceagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, CodeQL, Mend SAST, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
Aikido Security, Snyk CodeTwo alternatives
OWASP Dependency-Check, SnykGPT-5.4 miniSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisGitHub Code Scanning with CodeQL, SonarQubeno first choicenothing named
Two alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, GitLab SAST, SonarQubeOne alternative
Semgrep Community / free tierGemini 3.5 FlashAikido Securityagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisAikido Security, Snyk CodeChangedagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisAikido Security, Semgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: CodeQLSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: GitHub Advanced Securityagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk, Snyk CodeOne alternative
Semgrep AppSec PlatformThree alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
Aikido Security, GitLab SAST, SonarQubeThree alternatives
GitLab SAST, Snyk, SonarQubePerplexity SonarAikido SecuritySemgrep AppSec PlatformChangedagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: CodeAnt AIno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, traditional Fortify configurations
Two alternatives
CodeQL, Semgrep AppSec PlatformOne alternative
SonarQubeFour alternatives
Aikido Security, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeOne alternative
SonarQubeGrok 4.20Semgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSnykChangedagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk CodeSemgrep AppSec PlatformSnyk Codeagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, Micro Focus, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Aikido Security, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
CodeQL, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeMistral SmallGitHub Advanced Security, Snyk CodeSnykChangedSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
Checkmarx One, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeThree alternatives
Codiga, Qodana, Snyk CodeFour alternatives
Bandit, Brakeman, CodeQL, SonarQubeDeepSeek V4 FlashSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, CodeQL, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: SonarQubeSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Bandit, Black Duck Coverity, Brakeman, Checkmarx One, ESLint, OpenText Fortify, Perforce Klocwork, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
Codacy, Snyk Code, SonarQubeOne alternative
Snyk CodeFive alternatives
Aikido Security, Codacy, CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
CodeQL, OpengrepThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeLlama 4 Maverickno first choiceSemgrep AppSec PlatformChangedno first choiceSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
Aikido Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
CodeAnt AI, CodeQLQwen 3.7 FlashSonarQubeSnyk, SonarQubeChangedSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx Oneagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SnykOne alternative
Semgrep AppSec PlatformThree alternatives
Aikido Security, GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
GitLab SAST, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Snyk, SonarQubeKimi K2Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk CodeSnyk CodeChangedSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Aikido SecuritySemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platform, Snykagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Checkmarx One, HCL AppScan, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
Aikido Security, SonarQubeThree alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Codacy, DeepSource, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFive alternatives
Bandit, Brakeman, CodeQL, SonarQube, gosecThree alternatives
DeepSource, GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeGLM 4.7 FlashXSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSonarQubeChangedSemgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk Codeagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static Analysisno first choiceagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, Fluid Attacks, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk CodeSeven alternatives
Aikido Security, Bandit, Codacy, DeepSource, ESLint security plugins, SonarQube, gosecFive alternatives
Bandit, GitHub Advanced Security, GitLab SAST, SonarQube, gosecMiniMax M2.5CodeAnt AI, CodigaSnyk CodeChangedSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
Aikido Security, Snyk CodeOne alternative
SonarQubeOne alternative
Snyk CodeTwo alternatives
DeepSource, SonarQubeGPT-6 LunaSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldCodeQL, Semgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep's free AppSec Platform tieragainst: CodeQLno first choiceagainst: CodeQL, Semgrep's paid platform, Snyk Code, SonarQube
Two alternatives
CodeQL, SnykOne alternative
GitHub Advanced SecurityTwo alternatives
Snyk Code, SonarQubeOne alternative
Semgrep AppSec PlatformMuse Glimmer 30BSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformChangedagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx OneSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeagainst: OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify Software Security Center / Fortify SCA, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
Aikido Security, CodeAnt AI, CodigaTwo alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk CodeFive alternatives
Codacy, CodeAnt AI, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
CodeQL, SonarQubeFour alternatives
CodeQL, DeepSource, GitLab SAST, Snyk CodeBold is the first choiceAlternatives are counted; the count opens them.What the answer argued against
The record
One row per call: the version string exactly as returned, whether the model searched, sources cited, and latency.
Eighty-four rows: every prompt, every model, every answer.
| Prompt | Model | Version string | Time (UTC) | Searched | Sources | Latency |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Direct recommendation | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 08:28 | no | 0 | 4 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 12:53 | yes | 3 | 5 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 12:39 | yes | 15 | 32 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 10:40 | yes | 18 | 3 s |
| Direct recommendation | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 10:15 | yes | 20 | 8 s |
| Direct recommendation | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 09:19 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Direct recommendation | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 12:46 | yes | 21 | 40 s |
| Direct recommendation | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 09:54 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Direct recommendation | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 13:49 | no | 0 | 32 s |
| Direct recommendation | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 10:45 | yes | 19 | 20 s |
| Direct recommendation | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 11:44 | yes | 24 | 179 s |
| Direct recommendation | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 08:16 | yes | 12 | 25 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 12:48 | yes | 3 | 11 s |
| Direct recommendation | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 12:00 | yes | 14 | 26 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 10:58 | no | 0 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 07:59 | no | 0 | 3 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 13:31 | yes | 10 | 21 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 12:14 | yes | 19 | 3 s |
| Paraphrase | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 11:43 | yes | 23 | 6 s |
| Paraphrase | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 10:39 | yes | 13 | 8 s |
| Paraphrase | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 07:56 | yes | 24 | 25 s |
| Paraphrase | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 08:41 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Paraphrase | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 09:54 | yes | 5 | 21 s |
| Paraphrase | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 12:19 | yes | 15 | 18 s |
| Paraphrase | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 09:43 | yes | 25 | 16 s |
| Paraphrase | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 08:37 | yes | 5 | 20 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 10:23 | yes | 3 | 12 s |
| Paraphrase | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 08:05 | yes | 14 | 18 s |
| Comparative | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 11:20 | yes | 15 | 10 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 07:57 | yes | 8 | 9 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 12:47 | yes | 22 | 31 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 11:29 | yes | 20 | 5 s |
| Comparative | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 12:47 | yes | 21 | 10 s |
| Comparative | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 12:05 | yes | 6 | 8 s |
| Comparative | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 10:09 | yes | 21 | 44 s |
| Comparative | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 13:00 | yes | 5 | 1 s |
| Comparative | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 11:04 | yes | 15 | 30 s |
| Comparative | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 09:37 | yes | 18 | 29 s |
| Comparative | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 08:42 | yes | 20 | 46 s |
| Comparative | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 11:30 | yes | 10 | 17 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 11:02 | yes | 6 | 18 s |
| Comparative | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 08:25 | yes | 15 | 32 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 08:38 | no | 0 | 4 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 11:52 | yes | 2 | 5 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 11:25 | yes | 5 | 21 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 12:20 | yes | 18 | 2 s |
| Budget constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 08:53 | yes | 21 | 6 s |
| Budget constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 13:38 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Budget constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 10:36 | yes | 22 | 30 s |
| Budget constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 13:17 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Budget constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 12:14 | yes | 10 | 31 s |
| Budget constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 11:51 | yes | 9 | 15 s |
| Budget constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 10:21 | yes | 9 | 44 s |
| Budget constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 10:06 | yes | 12 | 23 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 11:58 | yes | 3 | 9 s |
| Budget constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 13:44 | yes | 11 | 19 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 09:35 | no | 0 | 6 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 09:04 | no | 0 | 8 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 10:17 | no | 0 | 15 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 08:44 | yes | 19 | 4 s |
| Scale constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 12:06 | yes | 15 | 10 s |
| Scale constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 08:54 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Scale constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 09:54 | yes | 18 | 48 s |
| Scale constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 09:56 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Scale constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 12:01 | no | 0 | 27 s |
| Scale constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 12:00 | yes | 18 | 33 s |
| Scale constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 08:08 | yes | 15 | 40 s |
| Scale constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 12:45 | no | 0 | 10 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 08:59 | yes | 3 | 14 s |
| Scale constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 09:07 | yes | 15 | 29 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-10-01 11:44 | yes | 10 | 8 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-10-01 11:06 | yes | 4 | 7 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.5-flash | 2026-10-01 12:57 | yes | 14 | 21 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-10-01 07:46 | yes | 24 | 3 s |
| Negative framing | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.1-fast-non-reasoning via vertex (asked for grok-4.20-non-reasoning; the API answered as this version) | 2026-10-01 12:32 | yes | 21 | 8 s |
| Negative framing | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-10-01 12:00 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-10-01 08:17 | yes | 18 | 67 s |
| Negative framing | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-10-01 13:45 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Negative framing | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-10-01 07:27 | yes | 14 | 64 s |
| Negative framing | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-10-01 11:55 | yes | 22 | 24 s |
| Negative framing | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-10-01 09:09 | yes | 19 | 54 s |
| Negative framing | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-10-01 10:58 | yes | 5 | 18 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-10-01 09:21 | yes | 4 | 20 s |
| Negative framing | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-10-01 12:04 | yes | 20 | 34 s |
Normalization in this category
Every judgment call made between the raw labels and the numbers above, listed so it is visible and reversible.
ShowHide
Category-scoped readings
Aikido read as Aikido Security
Checkmarx read as Checkmarx One
Checkmarx (Checkmarx One) read as Checkmarx One
Checkmarx (CxSAST / Checkmarx One) read as Checkmarx One
GitHub Advanced Security / CodeQL read as GitHub Advanced Security
GitHub Code Security with CodeQL read as GitHub Advanced Security
GitHub Code Security/CodeQL read as GitHub Advanced Security
GitLab read as GitLab SAST
GitLab Ultimate read as GitLab SAST
Mend.io read as Mend SAST
Semgrep read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Cloud/Team) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Community Edition) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Community) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Semgrep Code) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep Community Edition read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep Community Edition (CE) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep OSS read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Veracode read as Veracode Static Analysis
Veracode (enterprise plans) read as Veracode Static Analysis
Unresolved, counted raw
ESLint with typescript-eslint
GitHub Code Scanning with CodeQL
OpenText Fortify Software Security Center / Fortify SCA
PVS-Studio
Ruff
Semgrep Community / free tier
Semgrep's free AppSec Platform tier
Semgrep's paid platform
Snyk Code Team plan
Veracode SOSS
traditional Fortify configurations
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.