# Semgrep AI visibility in DevSecOps & Application Security

Canonical: https://devtune.ai/verticals/devsecops-application-security/semgrep

[Website](https://semgrep.dev/)

Updated: 2026-10-16T02:51:45.583033+00:00
Prompts: 25
Runs: 6


## Platforms

- google-ai-mode
- perplexity
- chatgpt-search
- google-ai
- bing-copilot-search
- xai-search

Rank: 5
Total brands: 12
Measured responses: 150
Presence percent: 16
Share of voice percent: 12.738853503184714
Average position: 25.216666666666665
Docs presence percent: 6.666666666666667
Blog presence percent: 5.333333333333334
Brand mention percent: 37.333333333333336


## Profile

Overview: Semgrep is a San Francisco-based application security platform founded in 2017 by Drew Dennison, Isaac Evans, and Luke O'Malley. It offers a unified suite of developer-first security tools—Semgrep Code (SAST), Semgrep Supply Chain (SCA), and Semgrep Secrets—delivered via a cloud-managed AppSec Platform. The platform combines deterministic static analysis with AI-powered triage, auto-remediation, and a 'Memories' feature that learns from past decisions to suppress recurring false positives. An open-source CLI engine drives broad community adoption, while commercial Pro and Enterprise tiers serve growth-stage and enterprise engineering teams. Semgrep has raised $204M in total funding, with a $100M Series D in February 2025 led by Menlo Ventures. Notable customers include Lyft, Dropbox, Figma, Slack, Snowflake, and GitLab.
Product summary: Semgrep is an AI-assisted application security platform offering SAST, SCA, and secrets detection in a single developer-centric product. Built on an open-source static analysis engine, it combines deterministic rule-based scanning with contextual AI (Semgrep Assistant/Multimodal) for detection, triage, and fix guidance. Key differentiators include reachability-based SCA filtering, a transparent YAML rule engine supporting custom organizational rules, and an AI 'Memories' system that compounds triage efficiency over time. The platform embeds into developer workflows via CLI, CI/CD, IDE plugins, PR comments, and AI coding tool integrations (MCP for Cursor/Replit), targeting both individual developers and large AppSec programs.


### Key capabilities

- AI-assisted SAST (Semgrep Code) with cross-file taint analysis and Pro Engine
- SCA with reachability analysis to filter unreachable dependency vulnerabilities (Semgrep Supply Chain)
- Secrets detection using semantic analysis, entropy analysis, and secret validation (Semgrep Secrets)
- AI 'Memories' feature that learns from past triage decisions to auto-suppress repeat false positives
- Customizable YAML-based rule engine with 3,000+ community and Pro rules
- Semgrep Multimodal: combines deterministic rule-based analysis with AI reasoning for complex logic flaw detection
- Malicious open-source dependency detection and SBOM generation
- Secure Guardrails: proactive in-workflow security guidance for developers at PR/IDE/MCP level
- EPSS-based vulnerability prioritization and license compliance checking



### Target users

- Application security (AppSec) engineers and security teams
- Software developers and DevSecOps practitioners
- CISOs and security leaders at growth-stage and enterprise companies
- Fintech and SaaS/cloud-native engineering organizations
- Security consultants performing code audits
- Startups and small teams (via free tier)



### Key use cases

- Shift-left SAST integrated into CI/CD pipelines and pull requests
- Reducing SCA alert noise via reachability analysis to surface only exploitable dependencies
- Detecting and remediating hardcoded secrets in source code repositories
- Securing AI-generated and vibe-coded applications
- Building organization-specific security guardrails with custom rules
- Software supply chain attack protection and open-source malware detection
- Automating AppSec triage and remediation at scale for resource-constrained security teams

Integrations ecosystem: CI/CD: GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Bitbucket Pipelines, Azure DevOps, and custom enterprise CI via API. SCM: GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure (on-prem SCM supported on Enterprise tier). IDEs: VS Code and JetBrains plugins. Ticketing: Jira. Security platforms: Palo Alto Networks Cortex, Wiz, Sysdig, StackHawk. AI coding tools: Cursor and Replit via MCP server integration. Notifications: Slack, email. REST API and webhooks available on Teams and Enterprise. Public rule Registry with 3,000+ community-contributed rules and an online Playground for rule authoring.
Pricing summary: Free Edition: $0 for up to 10 contributors; includes Semgrep Code and Supply Chain with Pro Engine, cross-file analysis, AI triage/remediation, and up to 50 repositories. Teams: starting at $30/month per contributor for Code or Supply Chain; $15/month per contributor for Secrets; includes SSO (OIDC/SAML), RBAC, REST API, Wiz and Palo Alto Networks integrations, and up to 500 private repositories. Enterprise: custom pricing; adds on-premises SCM support, custom CI/CD integrations, optional dedicated infrastructure deployment, unlimited repositories and contributors, dedicated account manager, tailored onboarding, volume pricing, and custom AI model provider. Contributors defined as anyone who committed to a scanned private repo in the past 90 days.
Review summary: Users consistently rate Semgrep highly for its low false-positive rate relative to competing SAST/SCA tools, fast scan performance, smooth CI/CD integration, and the flexibility of its YAML-based custom rule engine. AI-assisted triage and autofix features receive strong praise for accelerating remediation workflows. Common criticisms include the need for upfront rule tuning to reduce noise from default configurations, a learning curve for advanced custom rules, limited trunk-branch management features, and enterprise dashboarding maturity gaps compared to legacy incumbents. G2 rates Semgrep at 4.6/5 (55 reviews); Gartner Peer Insights rates it at 4.4/5 (15 reviews in the Application Security Testing market).
Competitive positioning: Semgrep positions as a developer-first, high-signal AppSec platform emphasizing low false-positive rates, reachability-based SCA prioritization, and AI-powered triage and remediation. The company explicitly benchmarks against Snyk and Checkmarx, claiming faster scans, superior accuracy, and a more transparent, customizable rule engine. Its open-source core (Semgrep OSS) drives community adoption while commercial Pro and Enterprise tiers monetize at-scale teams. Semgrep differentiates from legacy enterprise SAST vendors (Checkmarx, Veracode) through developer-centric design and CI/CD-native deployment, and from newer CNAPP players (Wiz, Aqua) by focusing solely on code-layer security across SAST, SCA, and secrets.
Limitations: On-premises SCM and custom CI/CD integrations are Enterprise-only. Custom AI model provider selection is restricted to the Enterprise tier. Secrets detection is not available on the Free plan. The Free plan is capped at 10 contributors and 50 repositories. Users report that out-of-the-box rule configurations may produce noisy results requiring upfront tuning effort. Review feedback notes a steep learning curve for advanced custom rule authoring and limited features for managing issues in trunk branches. Enterprise dashboarding and governance features are noted as less mature than legacy incumbents.


### Source urls

- https://semgrep.dev/
- https://semgrep.dev/pricing
- https://semgrep.dev/about/
- https://semgrep.dev/case-studies/lyft
- https://semgrep.dev/case-studies/vanta
- https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/semgrep-announces-100m-series-d-funding-to-advance-ai-powered-code-security-302367780.html
- https://news.crunchbase.com/cybersecurity/application-startup-semgrep-fundraise-menlo/
- https://www.g2.com/sellers/semgrep
- https://www.g2.com/products/semgrep/reviews
- https://www.g2.com/products/semgrep/reviews?qs=pros-and-cons
- https://www.gartner.com/reviews/market/application-security-testing/compare/semgrep-1700457513-vs-snyk
- https://pitchbook.com/profiles/company/234145-63

Reviewed at: 2026-04-28T23:07:20.422+00:00


### Customer outcomes

| Customer | Summary | Metric |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Lyft | Semgrep Supply Chain replaced a prior SCA tool that was too noisy for developers to act on. With reachability analysis, Lyft's security team gained confidence surfacing actionable SCA findings to developers and rapidly identified and remediated all Log4Shell instances upon disclo | 95% noise reduction in SCA findings |
| Vanta | Vanta replaced opaque, non-customizable SAST/SCA tools with Semgrep and used reachability analysis to filter hundreds of unreachable findings, uncovering two exploitable reachable vulnerabilities that would otherwise have been missed in the noise. | Not available |



### Reviews breakdown

| Platform | Score | Score max | Review count | Url |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| G2 | 4.6 | 5 | 55 | https://www.g2.com/products/semgrep/reviews |
| Gartner Peer Insights | 4.4 | 5 | 15 | https://www.gartner.com/reviews/market/application-security-testing/vendor/semgrep/product/semgrep-code |



### Review themes



#### Praised

- Low false-positive rate vs. competing SAST/SCA tools
- Fast scan performance with minimal CI/CD impact
- Flexible, human-readable YAML custom rule engine
- Smooth CI/CD and SCM integration
- AI-assisted triage and autofix guidance
- Transparent, actionable findings with line-level detail
- Strong reachability analysis for SCA noise reduction
- Extensive public rule registry for quick onboarding



#### Criticized

- Noisy results out-of-the-box requiring upfront rule tuning
- Steep learning curve for advanced custom rule authoring
- Limited trunk-branch issue management features
- Enterprise dashboarding and governance less mature than incumbents
- Occasional scan timeouts with AI-based scanning
- Complex to maintain at larger organizational scales
- Limited integrations with some third-party security products




### Company facts

Founded year: 2017
Hq: San Francisco, CA, USA


#### Founders

- Drew Dennison
- Isaac Evans
- Luke O'Malley

Employees range: 201-300
Total funding: $204M
Valuation: Not available
Arr: Not available
Customer count: 45+ enterprise customers
Status: Private


Readiness: Not available


## Ranking

| Display name | Pair count | Total pairs | Presence percent | Avg position |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Snyk | 42 | 150 | 28.000000000000004 | 24.479166666666668 |
| Endor Labs | 37 | 150 | 24.666666666666668 | 22.924050632911392 |
| Checkmarx | 31 | 150 | 20.666666666666668 | 21.4875 |
| Wiz | 28 | 150 | 18.666666666666668 | 22.822580645161292 |
| Semgrep | 24 | 150 | 16 | 25.216666666666665 |
| Veracode | 14 | 150 | 9.333333333333334 | 26.181818181818183 |
| Jit | 9 | 150 | 6 | 23.666666666666668 |
| Aqua Security | 7 | 150 | 4.666666666666667 | 32.25 |
| SonarSource | 6 | 150 | 4 | 23.25 |
| Socket | 4 | 150 | 2.666666666666667 | 6.375 |
| GitGuardian | 3 | 150 | 2 | 28.7 |
| Chainguard | 0 | 150 | 0 | Not available |



## Platform breakdown

| Platform | Prompt count | Presence rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| google-ai-mode | 0 | 0 |
| perplexity | 7 | 28.000000000000004 |
| chatgpt-search | 9 | 36 |
| google-ai | 0 | 0 |
| bing-copilot-search | 0 | 0 |
| xai-search | 8 | 32 |



## Strengths

| Prompt text | Platform count | Avg position |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Which security scanning tools are best at reducing noise so developers actually act on alerts instead of ignoring them? | 2 | 1 |
| What security tooling do teams typically use for managing findings across dozens of repositories from a single security engineer workflow? | 1 | 3 |
| Which security scanning platforms handle availability well so a critical fix can still ship even if the scanning service goes down temporarily? | 1 | 4 |



## Gaps

| Prompt text | Competitor presence count |
| --- | --- |
| Which software supply chain security tools detect malicious packages, not just known vulnerable versions? | 5 |
| Which application security platforms go beyond known CVEs to detect logic-level vulnerabilities and misconfigurations? | 4 |
| What tools cover SAST, DAST, and SCA in one platform — and which do teams use to cover all three vulnerability types without tool sprawl? | 3 |
| Which DevSecOps tools integrate best with SIEM platforms for correlating app security findings with infrastructure events? | 3 |
| I'm rolling out a software composition analysis tool across an engineering org — which platforms have the smoothest onboarding for large teams? | 2 |



## Topic scores

| Topic name | Prompt count | Cited prompt count |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Capability | 5 | 1 |
| Developer Experience | 5 | 5 |
| Integrations & Ecosystem | 5 | 1 |
| Performance & Reliability | 5 | 3 |
| Setup & First Run | 5 | 1 |



## Prompt results

- Prompt text: What secrets management tools are best for a small startup team to ensure developers never commit credentials to the repo?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 28 |


- Prompt text: I'm rolling out a software composition analysis tool across an engineering org — which platforms have the smoothest onboarding for large teams?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |
| SonarSource | 27 |
| Wiz | 28 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning platforms handle availability well so a critical fix can still ship even if the scanning service goes down temporarily?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: 4
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 4 |
| Snyk | 8 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Wiz | 6 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |
| Aqua Security | 41 |
| Snyk | 65 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps platforms handle vulnerability prioritisation well when there are hundreds of findings across multiple repositories?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 4
Chatgpt-search: 8
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 7



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |
| Wiz | 6 |
| Semgrep | 8 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 2 |
| Semgrep | 7 |
| Endor Labs | 9 |
| Checkmarx | 11 |
| Wiz | 14 |
| Jit | 17 |
| Aqua Security | 36 |


- Prompt text: Which SAST tools integrate into an existing CI pipeline without slowing down developer velocity?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 1
Chatgpt-search: 1
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 52



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 10 |
| Snyk | 38 |
| Semgrep | 52 |


- Prompt text: Which application security tools offer the best IDE-native experience vs. CI-only scanning — and what are the tradeoffs for developer adoption?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 1
Chatgpt-search: 10
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 25



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| SonarSource | 4 |
| Veracode | 6 |
| Semgrep | 10 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 6 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Veracode | 16 |
| Semgrep | 25 |
| SonarSource | 45 |


- Prompt text: What tools cover SAST, DAST, and SCA in one platform — and which do teams use to cover all three vulnerability types without tool sprawl?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 3 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 3 |
| Snyk | 25 |
| Veracode | 32 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Jit | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |
| Wiz | 15 |
| Endor Labs | 22 |
| Veracode | 49 |


- Prompt text: Which application security scanning tools are fastest at scale and least likely to slow down PR pipelines as the codebase grows?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: 1
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 22



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 8 |
| SonarSource | 10 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 6 |
| Checkmarx | 20 |
| Semgrep | 22 |
| Wiz | 26 |
| Jit | 33 |


- Prompt text: Which runtime application security tools have the lowest production overhead and are safe to run on high-traffic services?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 53 |
| Snyk | 57 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps platforms have the best two-way integration with ticketing systems for tracking vulnerability remediation end to end?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |
| Wiz | 10 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 4 |
| Wiz | 27 |
| Snyk | 35 |
| Endor Labs | 84 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning tools are best at reducing noise so developers actually act on alerts instead of ignoring them?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 1
Chatgpt-search: 1
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Snyk | 7 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 9 |
| Snyk | 29 |
| Wiz | 43 |


- Prompt text: Which enterprise application security platforms scale best when scanning thousands of repositories across multiple teams?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 1
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 34



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Veracode | 7 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Checkmarx | 14 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Checkmarx | 6 |
| Wiz | 7 |
| Semgrep | 34 |
| Snyk | 89 |


- Prompt text: Which security scanning platforms have the best support for SBOM generation workflows for compliance and audit requirements?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 18 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 16 |
| Checkmarx | 19 |
| Jit | 21 |
| Aqua Security | 24 |


- Prompt text: What cloud security posture management tools integrate well with container and orchestration platform security scanning?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 8 |
| Checkmarx | 9 |
| Jit | 19 |
| Aqua Security | 49 |


- Prompt text: Which application security tools integrate natively into the pull request workflow so findings can block or warn on merges?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 6
Chatgpt-search: 29
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |
| Semgrep | 6 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| Snyk | 13 |
| Veracode | 14 |
| Semgrep | 29 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| SonarSource | 7 |
| Endor Labs | 13 |
| Wiz | 31 |
| Veracode | 33 |
| Snyk | 43 |


- Prompt text: Which security vendors update their vulnerability databases fastest after major CVE disclosures like Log4Shell?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 10 |
| Endor Labs | 21 |
| Checkmarx | 45 |
| Snyk | 60 |


- Prompt text: Which software supply chain security tools detect malicious packages, not just known vulnerable versions?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Socket | 3 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Socket | 1 |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Socket | 1 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 1 |
| Snyk | 6 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |
| Veracode | 5 |
| Snyk | 9 |
| Endor Labs | 11 |
| Socket | 20 |


- Prompt text: What security tooling do teams typically use for managing findings across dozens of repositories from a single security engineer workflow?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 3



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 3 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 3 |
| Wiz | 23 |
| Endor Labs | 39 |


- Prompt text: Which application security platforms are best at communicating vulnerabilities to developers in an actionable way rather than just generating noise?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: 1
Chatgpt-search: 12
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 62



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 1 |
| Snyk | 2 |



##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 2 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |
| Semgrep | 12 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Wiz | 7 |
| Veracode | 14 |
| Checkmarx | 18 |
| Snyk | 35 |
| Semgrep | 62 |


- Prompt text: What are the best container image scanning tools that catch vulnerabilities before images are pushed to production?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Aqua Security | 1 |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Aqua Security | 3 |
| Wiz | 4 |
| Jit | 11 |
| Checkmarx | 12 |


- Prompt text: Which application security platforms go beyond known CVEs to detect logic-level vulnerabilities and misconfigurations?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 1 |
| Endor Labs | 4 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 3 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 3 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 3 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 21 |
| Endor Labs | 61 |


- Prompt text: What are the best software supply chain security tools for a polyglot monorepo with Node.js, Python, and Go services?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |



##### Perplexity

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Snyk | 4 |



##### Chatgpt-search





##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 6 |
| Wiz | 8 |
| Jit | 14 |
| Snyk | 39 |
| Aqua Security | 67 |


- Prompt text: Which secret scanning tools are best at both detecting credentials in git history and preventing new secrets from being committed?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode





##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 6 |



##### Google-ai





##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| GitGuardian | 4 |
| Jit | 5 |
| Checkmarx | 20 |


- Prompt text: Which DevSecOps tools integrate best with SIEM platforms for correlating app security findings with infrastructure events?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: Not available
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: Not available



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 1 |
| Veracode | 2 |



##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Wiz | 2 |
| Snyk | 20 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 5 |



##### Bing-copilot-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 2 |



##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Checkmarx | 24 |
| Endor Labs | 34 |
| Wiz | 47 |
| Jit | 54 |
| Snyk | 57 |


- Prompt text: Which SAST tools have the lowest real-world false positive rates and the best tooling for managing them at scale?


#### Brand position by platform

Google-ai-mode: Not available
Perplexity: Not available
Chatgpt-search: 3
Google-ai: Not available
Bing-copilot-search: Not available
Xai-search: 47



#### Platform rows



##### Google-ai-mode

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 3 |



##### Perplexity





##### Chatgpt-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Semgrep | 3 |
| Veracode | 5 |
| Checkmarx | 7 |



##### Google-ai

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 2 |
| Wiz | 4 |



##### Bing-copilot-search





##### Xai-search

| Display name | Position |
| --- | --- |
| Endor Labs | 1 |
| Checkmarx | 26 |
| SonarSource | 29 |
| Veracode | 36 |
| Semgrep | 47 |





## Top sources

| Url | Title | Domain | Logo url | Source vertical | Content type | Citation count | Last30d count |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| https://semgrep.dev/docs/semgrep-ci/sample-ci-configs | Sample CI configurations \| Semgrep | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 10 | 10 |
| https://semgrep.dev/ | Semgrep App Security Platform \| AI-assisted SAST, SCA and Secrets Detection | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 7 | 7 |
| https://semgrep.dev/products/integrations/ | Integrations | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 6 | 6 |
| https://docs.semgrep.dev/deployment/oss-deployment | Semgrep Community Edition in CI | docs.semgrep.dev | Not available | commercial | documentation | 3 | 3 |
| https://semgrep.dev/products/semgrep-supply-chain/ | Semgrep Supply Chain \| Protect Dependencies with Software Composition Analysis (SCA) | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 3 | 3 |
| https://semgrep.dev/docs/for-developers/resolve-findings-through-app | Resolve findings through Semgrep AppSec Platform | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 3 | 3 |
| https://semgrep.dev/docs/workflows/overview | Workflows (beta) | semgrep.dev | https://izgwnlozsmjmqjsnddmg.supabase.co/storage/v1/object/public/domain-logos/9dbab6f8-54b2-49a0-8181-89a0ed130318/b67f9606-50e9-4f35-942d-4f43a200da2c/68c9162599cb9f3214c6099e3be911185a62285a.png | commercial | product_page | 3 | 3 |
| https://docs.semgrep.dev/semgrep-pro-vs-oss | Semgrep AppSec Platform versus ... | docs.semgrep.dev | Not available | commercial | documentation | 2 | 2 |



## Response excerpts

| Prompt text | Platform | Excerpt |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Which DevSecOps platforms handle vulnerability prioritisation well when there are hundreds of findings across multiple repositories? | perplexity | Semgrep AppSec Platform — Particularly worth evaluating when you want to reduce dependency-finding noise using reachability. |
| Which SAST tools integrate into an existing CI pipeline without slowing down developer velocity? | perplexity | Semgrep — Supports common CI systems including GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Jenkins, CircleCI, Azure Pipelines, Bitbucket, and Buildkite. |
| Which application security tools offer the best IDE-native experience vs. CI-only scanning — and what are the tradeoffs for developer adoption? | perplexity | ## Short answer For security findings while code is being written, Semgrep and Snyk are the clearest IDE-first choices in the search results. |



## Competitor excerpts

| Platform | Competitor name | Excerpt |
| --- | --- | --- |
| google-ai-mode | Endor Labs | [Kodem Security] * Endor Labs (Package Firewall) — Combines function-level reachability analysis with package security policies and firewall capabilities to screen against suspicious or malicious open-source packages at install time. |
| google-ai-mode | Socket | Socket - Block zero-day supply chain attacksSocket.dev: Detecting Supply Chain Attacks Before They Hit Leading tools specialized in or capable of detecting... |
| perplexity | Socket | Socket — analyzes dependency code and metadata for signs such as unexpected install scripts, network or shell access, obfuscation, and typosquatting. |
| chatgpt-search | Socket | ## Tools worth shortlisting ## 1. Socket Strongest fit for proactive detection Analyzes dependency source code, metadata, and maintainer activity for suspicious behavior, including obfuscated code, unexpected install scripts, network access, typosqu... |
| google-ai | Checkmarx | Checkmarx The primary tools designed to detect malicious packages and suspicious package behavior include: ### 1\. |
| google-ai-mode | Wiz | wiz.io/academy/application-security/business-logic-vulnerabilities)How to Detect Business Logic Vulnerabilities in API \| APIsec[AI Application Security (AI AppSec) \| ZeroPa... |
| perplexity | Checkmarx | Checkmarx DAST — tests running applications for business-logic flaws, authentication bypasses, API issues, and misconfigurations. |
| google-ai | Snyk | Snyk * Examples: _Wiz_ , _Prisma Cloud (Palo Alto Networks)_ , _Veracode (Dynamic/Interactive)_ , _Invicti_ . * How they go beyond CVEs: They evaluate the entire runtime ecosystem—scanning for overly permissive identity access managem... |
| bing-copilot-search | Wiz | Application Detection & Response (ADR) * AccuKnox ADR, Contrast Security ADR, Wiz ADR – Monitor applications at runtime with eBPF sensors and anomaly detection. |
| google-ai-mode | Veracode | Checkmarx One: 7 Features, Limitations & Alternatives * Veracode — Veracode's unified platform natively integrates Veracode Static Analysis (SAST), Veracode Software Composition Analysis (SCA), and Veracode Dynamic Analysis (DAST). |
| perplexity | Checkmarx | Checkmarx One explicitly includes all three, alongside capabilities such as API, IaC, container, and supply-chain security. |
| chatgpt-search | Checkmarx | # Best platforms for SAST, DAST, and SCA in one solution If your goal is to cover SAST, DAST, and SCA without creating a sprawling security toolchain, start by evaluating Checkmarx One, Veracode, HCL AppScan, and GitLab Ultimate. |



## Trend

Visibility delta: -2.1999999999999993
Avg position delta: 4.305555555555555
Citation count delta: 18