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. 49 first choices recorded across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, fourteen models each.
Standing · first-choice share
82%
Clear leader
82Semgrep AppSec Platform14SonarQube04Snyk
82% of first choices, clear leader.
Since October 2026▲+29Since October 2026: 53% → 82%, +29 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement.Semgrep AppSec Platform held the lead, +29 points on 53%, 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 Platform82%Clear leader▲+29Since October 2026: 53% → 82%, +29 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement.This pageMid-marketSemgrep AppSec Platform71%Clear leader▲+35Since October 2026: 36% → 71%, +35 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement.Standing →Enterprise
Checkmarx One53%Clear leader▼−1Since October 2026: 54% → 53%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.Standing →
Checkmarx One53%Clear leader▼−1Since October 2026: 54% → 53%, −1 point. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.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 October 2026
01Semgrep AppSec Platform82%1%76endorsed leader▲+29Since October 2026: 53% → 82%, +29 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement.53% → 82%
02SonarQube14%14%73accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 14% → 14%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.14% → 14%
03
Snyk4%14%14accepted challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 9% → 4%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.9% → 4%
Snyk4%14%14accepted challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 9% → 4%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.9% → 4%Show the eleven products at 0%, ordered by negative rate
12
OpenText Fortify0%100%16criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
OpenText Fortify0%100%16criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%11
Black Duck Coverity0%100%10criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
Black Duck Coverity0%100%10criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%13
Veracode Static Analysis0%93%27criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
Veracode Static Analysis0%93%27criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%14Checkmarx One0%86%42criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
Checkmarx One0%86%42criticized challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%09Bandit0%24%17accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
05CodeQL0%10%29accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
10
GitLab SAST0%9%11accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%
GitLab SAST0%9%11accepted challenger=heldSince October 2026: 0% → 0%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.0% → 0%04
Snyk Code0%9%46accepted challenger▼−11Since October 2026: 11% → 0%, −11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.11% → 0%
Snyk Code0%9%46accepted challenger▼−11Since October 2026: 11% → 0%, −11 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.11% → 0%07
Aikido Security0%6%17accepted challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 0%
Aikido Security0%6%17accepted challenger▼−5Since October 2026: 5% → 0%, −5 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.5% → 0%06
GitHub Advanced Security0%4%26accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 0%
GitHub Advanced Security0%4%26accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 0%08
CodeAnt AI0%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.2% → 0%
CodeAnt AI0%0%10accepted challenger▼−2Since October 2026: 2% → 0%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise.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. Both editions asked the same fourteen models. 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 Aikido SecuritySemgrep AppSec Platform vs Snyk Code
Head-to-head pages are published for mid-market buyers, so these open on mid-market figures, not small business.All ten head-to-head pages: the top five products, each against each
One product takes 82% of first choices here, so the chart would put thirteen markers in one corner and one at the far edge. The two measurements it plots are columns in the standing above: share, and the negative label rate. Four products carry a negative rate above 25% in this category.
What they warned about
Nine of fourteen models held their first choice under the paraphrase. Claude Haiku 4.5, Gemini 3.5 Flash, Grok 4.20, Qwen 3.7 Flash and MiniMax M2.5 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 One86%
36 of 42 labels negative · 14 of 14 models · 15 hard negative
“Enterprise platforms to avoid / be cautious with ... Checkmarx's pricing is opaque and enterprise-oriented, typically starting around $40,000 per year” Muse Glimmer 30B, negative prompt
Veracode Static Analysis93%
25 of 27 labels negative · 13 of 14 models · 11 hard negative
“Premium enterprise SAST ... routinely grouped with Checkmarx/Fortify as an "enterprise assessment" lane and with quote-only pricing” Muse Glimmer 30B, negative prompt
OpenText Fortify100%
16 of 16 labels negative · 12 of 14 models · 10 hard negative
“Legacy Enterprise SAST Heavyweights ... Why to avoid/be cautious: Cost: Multi-thousand to hundred-thousand-dollar annual contracts” Gemini 3.5 Flash, negative prompt
Black Duck Coverity100%
10 of 10 labels negative · 9 of 14 models · 7 hard negative
“Verdict: Avoid unless you're in aerospace, automotive, or other industries requiring deep static analysis for C/C++.” Kimi K2, 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
68 of 84 answers in this category came back with a source list, from 13 of 14 models: citations where the model returns them, or the search results it consulted. 720 links across 158 sites, every framing counted. Ranked by the number of answers carrying the site or page. The other 1 model searched through a gateway that returned no source list on this edition. 42 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.
vendor site · Safeguard31 answers · 57 citations · 11 models
30 answers · 52 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Checkmarx23 answers · 28 citations · 10 models
21 answers · 21 citations · 10 models
19 answers · 21 citations · 7 models
vendor site · G217 answers · 19 citations · 8 models
vendor site · OWASP16 answers · 18 citations · 7 models
publisher (Gane)16 answers · 16 citations · 7 models
vendor site · DeepSource15 answers · 15 citations · 8 models
15 answers · 15 citations · 9 models
vendor site · Semgrep14 answers · 15 citations · 6 models
14 answers · 14 citations · 6 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.
23 answers · 9 models
20 answers · 9 models
18 answers · 10 models
16 answers · 7 models
15 answers · 8 models
15 answers · 9 models
12 answers · 5 models
11 answers · 5 models
11 answers · 6 models
10 answers · 5 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 | 82% | 167 | 3,461 | 43 | |||
| SonarQube | 14% | 14,800 | 1,353 | ||||
| Snyk snyk.io Snyk 4%, Snyk Code 0% | 4% | 150 | 12,100 | 581 | 61,651 | 60 | |
| CodeQL | 0% | 2,900 | 81 | ||||
| GitHub parent site GitHub Advanced Security 0%, GitHub Code Security 0% | 0% | 78 | 1,500,000 | 31,479 | |||
| Aikido aikido.dev Aikido Security 0% | 0% | 326 | 2,400 | 51 | 6,442 company | $936 | 120 |
| CodeAnt AI codeant.ai | 0% | 18 | 260 | 9 | 2,282 | $472 | 56 |
| Bandit | 0% | 110,000 | 23,958 | ||||
| GitLab parent site GitLab SAST 0%, GitLab Security 0% | 0% | 24 | 90,500 | 4,844 | |||
| gosec | 0% | 170 | 5 |
Google's top ten for the three searches hold 24 sites; 3 of them are among the sites the models cited here (checkmarx.com, community.owasp.org, 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 4.5Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeSnyk, SonarQubeChangedagainst: Checkmarx OneCodeQL, Semgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, GitLab SAST, Snyk Code
Three alternatives
Aikido Security, CodeAnt AI, SnykTwo alternatives
OWASP Dependency-Check, Semgrep AppSec PlatformThree alternatives
Aikido Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
Aikido Security, CodeAnt AI, SonarQubeGPT-5.4 miniSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldagainst: Checkmarx OneSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choicenothing named
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Security Code Scan, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
GitHub code scanning with CodeQL, SonarQubeGemini 3.5 FlashSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSonarQubeChangedagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, CodeQL, GitHub Advanced Security, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Snyk CodeSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Checkmarx One, IBM AppScan, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk CodeThree alternatives
Native GitLab SAST, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Bandit, SonarQube, eslint-plugin-security, gosecFour alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, GitLab Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubePerplexity SonarSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysisno first choiceagainst: Bandit, Black Duck Coverity, Brakeman, Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Five alternatives
Aikido Security, CodeQL, GitHub Code Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeSix alternatives
Aikido Security, Codacy, CodeQL, GitLab SAST, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFive alternatives
Bandit, Brakeman, CodeQL, GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeGrok 4.20Semgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx OneSonarQubeChangedagainst: Bandit, Checkmarx One, ESLint, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Snykno first choiceagainst: SonarQubeagainst: Bandit, Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, Clang Static Analyzer, ESLint security plugins, OX Security, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Four alternatives
CodeAnt AI, GitLab SAST, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec PlatformThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Bandit, CodeQL, SonarQube, gosecMistral SmallSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldAikido Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk Codeagainst: Checkmarx OneSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Four alternatives
Codacy, Guardrails, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeAnt AI, GitLab SAST, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk CodeDeepSeek V4 FlashSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Bandit, CodeQL, SonarQube, gosecThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeLlama 4 MaverickSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldno first choiceSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, Snyk Code
Three alternatives
GitHub Code Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Aikido Security, QodanaQwen 3.7 FlashSnykSonarQubeChangedagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx OneSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: SonarQubeSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, SonarQubeagainst: Checkmarx One, Checkstyle, OpenText Fortify, PMD, SonarQube, SpotBugs
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeThree alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SnykThree alternatives
CodeAnt AI, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Bandit, Brakeman, CodeQL, gosecOne alternative
SnykKimi K2Semgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Checkmarx Oneagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Snyk, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Four alternatives
Aikido.dev, CodeAnt AI, Snyk Code, SonarQubeOne alternative
SnykFour alternatives
CodeQL, Qodana, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Qodana, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Semgrep AppSec Platform, Snyk, SonarQubeGLM 4.7 FlashXSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static AnalysisSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx OneSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Find Security Bugsno first choiceagainst: Aikido Security, Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, CodeQL, HCL AppScan, OpenText Fortify, Perforce Klocwork, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Five alternatives
Aikido Security, CodeAnt AI, Qodana, Snyk Code, SonarQubeThree alternatives
Bandit, Jit, SonarQubeFour alternatives
Maze, Qodana, Snyk Code, SonarQubeSeven alternatives
Bandit, Brakeman, Codacy, DeepSource, Snyk Code, SonarQube, gosecMiniMax M2.5Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeSonarQubeChangedSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Black Duck CoveritySemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformagainst: Checkmarx One, Veracode Static Analysisagainst: Checkmarx One, OpenText Fortify, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
Checkmarx One, Micro Focus Fortify Static Code Analyzer, Snyk CodeTwo alternatives
Checkmarx One, Snyk CodeFive alternatives
CodeAnt AI, GitHub Advanced Security, Qodana, Snyk Code, SonarQubeFour alternatives
CodeQL, GitHub Advanced Security, GitLab SAST, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
Snyk Code, SonarQubeGPT-6 LunaSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldCodeQL, Semgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Bandit, Checkmarx One, CodeQL, OpenText Fortify, Semgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Two alternatives
CodeQL, Snyk CodeOne alternative
CodeQLTwo alternatives
Snyk Code, SonarQubeMuse Glimmer 30BSemgrep AppSec PlatformSemgrep AppSec PlatformHeldagainst: Snyk CodeSemgrep AppSec Platform, SonarQubeSemgrep AppSec Platformno first choiceagainst: Black Duck Coverity, Checkmarx One, HCL AppScan, OpenText Fortify, SonarQube, Veracode Static Analysis
Three alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Code, SonarQubeTwo alternatives
GitHub Advanced Security, SonarQubeThree alternatives
Aikido Security, GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk CodeOne alternative
SonarQubeBold 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 | 2026-11-01 11:19 | yes | 10 | 9 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 10:15 | yes | 3 | 6 s |
| Direct recommendation | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 11:07 | no | 0 | 14 s |
| Direct recommendation | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 18:58 | yes | 10 | 4 s |
| Direct recommendation | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 19:10 | yes | 5 | 9 s |
| Direct recommendation | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 12:32 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Direct recommendation | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 15:13 | yes | 22 | 26 s |
| Direct recommendation | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 17:03 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Direct recommendation | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 14:43 | no | 0 | 29 s |
| Direct recommendation | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 12:48 | yes | 14 | 39 s |
| Direct recommendation | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 17:22 | yes | 17 | 85 s |
| Direct recommendation | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 17:16 | no | 0 | 35 s |
| Direct recommendation | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 14:26 | yes | 3 | 12 s |
| Direct recommendation | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 10:23 | yes | 24 | 36 s |
| Paraphrase | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 10:26 | no | 0 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 15:31 | yes | 4 | 5 s |
| Paraphrase | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 10:05 | no | 0 | 16 s |
| Paraphrase | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 14:17 | yes | 10 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 15:29 | yes | 5 | 9 s |
| Paraphrase | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 13:56 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Paraphrase | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 09:14 | yes | 24 | 22 s |
| Paraphrase | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 08:53 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Paraphrase | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 19:40 | no | 0 | 26 s |
| Paraphrase | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 19:29 | yes | 10 | 16 s |
| Paraphrase | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 12:20 | yes | 13 | 21 s |
| Paraphrase | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 19:37 | no | 0 | 80 s |
| Paraphrase | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 08:52 | yes | 4 | 11 s |
| Paraphrase | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:56 | yes | 15 | 25 s |
| Comparative | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 12:29 | yes | 17 | 12 s |
| Comparative | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 11:54 | yes | 4 | 9 s |
| Comparative | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 19:37 | no | 0 | 20 s |
| Comparative | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 18:30 | yes | 10 | 7 s |
| Comparative | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:09 | yes | 10 | 16 s |
| Comparative | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 11:41 | yes | 5 | 7 s |
| Comparative | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 11:03 | yes | 23 | 69 s |
| Comparative | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 18:04 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Comparative | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 10:36 | yes | 5 | 23 s |
| Comparative | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 13:56 | yes | 23 | 72 s |
| Comparative | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 10:44 | yes | 19 | 32 s |
| Comparative | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 10:52 | yes | 9 | 98 s |
| Comparative | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 18:36 | yes | 6 | 15 s |
| Comparative | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 10:22 | yes | 15 | 26 s |
| Budget constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 12:23 | yes | 17 | 10 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 17:23 | yes | 3 | 4 s |
| Budget constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 11:37 | no | 0 | 13 s |
| Budget constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 19:21 | yes | 10 | 3 s |
| Budget constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:07 | yes | 5 | 8 s |
| Budget constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 09:11 | yes | 5 | 6 s |
| Budget constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 16:19 | yes | 18 | 25 s |
| Budget constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 11:58 | yes | 5 | 2 s |
| Budget constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 15:16 | yes | 12 | 24 s |
| Budget constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 11:53 | yes | 9 | 47 s |
| Budget constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 12:11 | yes | 14 | 34 s |
| Budget constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 18:05 | yes | 5 | 19 s |
| Budget constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 19:04 | yes | 2 | 12 s |
| Budget constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:32 | yes | 15 | 20 s |
| Scale constrained | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 10:44 | no | 0 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 08:47 | no | 0 | 7 s |
| Scale constrained | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 11:51 | no | 0 | 17 s |
| Scale constrained | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 08:40 | yes | 10 | 8 s |
| Scale constrained | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 14:58 | yes | 10 | 13 s |
| Scale constrained | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 13:52 | no | 0 | 5 s |
| Scale constrained | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 18:03 | yes | 21 | 40 s |
| Scale constrained | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 17:02 | yes | 5 | 3 s |
| Scale constrained | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 09:55 | yes | 8 | 23 s |
| Scale constrained | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 11:37 | yes | 14 | 26 s |
| Scale constrained | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 15:16 | yes | 14 | 39 s |
| Scale constrained | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 13:10 | no | 0 | 13 s |
| Scale constrained | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 11:55 | yes | 3 | 14 s |
| Scale constrained | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 19:05 | yes | 13 | 21 s |
| Negative framing | Claude Haiku 4.5 | claude-haiku-4-5-20251001 | 2026-11-01 15:01 | yes | 18 | 10 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-5.4 mini | gpt-5.4-mini-2026-03-17 | 2026-11-01 15:19 | yes | 3 | 5 s |
| Negative framing | Gemini 3.5 Flash | gemini-3.6-flash (asked for gemini-3.5-flash; the API answered as this version) | 2026-11-01 18:22 | no | 0 | 14 s |
| Negative framing | Perplexity Sonar | sonar | 2026-11-01 15:30 | yes | 10 | 20 s |
| Negative framing | Grok 4.20 | spacexai/grok-4.20-non-reasoning via xai | 2026-11-01 17:40 | yes | 9 | 13 s |
| Negative framing | Mistral Small | mistral/mistral-small via mistral | 2026-11-01 11:46 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | DeepSeek V4 Flash | deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash via deepinfra | 2026-11-01 14:09 | yes | 21 | 33 s |
| Negative framing | Llama 4 Maverick | meta/llama-4-maverick via bedrock | 2026-11-01 16:20 | yes | 5 | 4 s |
| Negative framing | Qwen 3.7 Flash | alibaba/qwen3.7-flash via alibaba | 2026-11-01 10:26 | no | 0 | 33 s |
| Negative framing | Kimi K2 | moonshotai/kimi-k2 via novita | 2026-11-01 17:40 | yes | 24 | 43 s |
| Negative framing | GLM 4.7 FlashX | zai/glm-4.7-flashx via zai | 2026-11-01 09:09 | yes | 16 | 30 s |
| Negative framing | MiniMax M2.5 | minimax/minimax-m2.5 via minimax | 2026-11-01 17:47 | yes | 10 | 39 s |
| Negative framing | GPT-6 Luna | gpt-6-luna | 2026-11-01 15:26 | yes | 4 | 18 s |
| Negative framing | Muse Glimmer 30B | meta/muse-glimmer-30b via togetherai | 2026-11-01 12:13 | yes | 13 | 21 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 (on-prem) read as Checkmarx One
GitHub Advanced Security / 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
GitLab's basic SAST analyzers read as GitLab SAST
Mend (WhiteSource) read as Mend SAST
Semgrep read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Community Edition) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep (Semgrep Code) read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep Code read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Semgrep Community Edition read as Semgrep AppSec Platform
Veracode read as Veracode Static Analysis
Unresolved, counted raw
Aikido.dev
Bearer CLI
Checkstyle
Clang Static Analyzer
ESLint Security
GitHub CodeQL Advanced Security
GitHub code scanning with CodeQL
Micro Focus Fortify Static Code Analyzer
Native GitLab SAST
OWASP DepCheck / OWASP SAST tools
Security Code Scan
Snyk Code free IDE tier
Splint
eslint-plugin-security
sobelow
Discontinued, still offered
No shut-down product was recommended here.