Aikido alternatives

We build CRACI, so weigh that in; we describe every option from its own documentation and say when another tool fits better.

Why teams look beyond Aikido

Aikido's strength is breadth. Every plan lists SCA, SAST, secrets detection, IaC, cloud posture, container scanning, DAST, license scanning and SBOM generation, and it adds runtime protection. Its SCA uses function-level reachability, AutoFix opens pull requests, CI checks can block pull requests with critical risks, and higher plans include SOC 2 and ISO 27001 reports. For a small team that needs coverage quickly, that is a strong offer.

Teams still compare alternatives, usually for reasons of scope and fit:

• Depth in one area. A broad suite makes trade-offs. If dependency risk or malicious packages are your main problem, a specialist may go further.
• Evidence of the build. Aikido builds its dependency view from manifests and lockfiles. Some teams need a record of what each build actually fetched for customers or the Cyber Resilience Act.
• Consolidation elsewhere. You may be standardizing on GitHub's own security products instead.
• Pricing model. Aikido has a free Developer plan, and paid plans start at $350 per month (as of September 2026). A free, open-source scanner may cover what you need.

What to look for

• Which risks you actually need covered: code, dependencies, cloud, running apps or the build itself.
• Where the dependency list comes from: manifests and lockfiles, source analysis, or the build.
• How findings are cut down: reachability, exploit data, or both.
• Whether you need to block bad packages before they install.
• SBOMs, provenance and other evidence you can hand to a customer or an auditor.
• The CI systems you run, and whether pricing is per developer, per committer or flat.

The options

1. CRACI (our product)

CRACI is the runner your GitHub Actions jobs execute on. You change runs-on to craci, and a package-aware proxy records what each job fetches, including packages restored from CI caches. Each SBOM states its completeness per job and per cache. CRACI enforces an egress policy that fails closed, re-evaluates monitored SBOMs continuously. SBOMs export as CycloneDX or SPDX, and the API returns SBOMs, network traces and provenance. CRACI's inventory view shows exactly which software versions are deployed to which products, globally.

Best for: teams on GitHub Actions that need evidence of what each release was built from. Consider if: you accept a narrow scope. CRACI does no SAST, secrets, IaC, cloud, DAST or reachability work, and it supports GitHub Actions only today, with GitLab CI and Jenkins on the roadmap. It fits next to Aikido more often than in place of it. CRACI vs Aikido

2. Snyk

Snyk is developer-first security that runs in the IDE, the CLI, SCM integrations and CI. For dependencies it prioritizes by reachability, exploit maturity, EPSS and CVSS, opens upgrade pull requests and supports license policies. Snyk Code, Snyk Container and Snyk IaC cover code, images and infrastructure.

Best for: teams that want feedback in the editor and on every pull request. Consider if: Snyk's pricing suits you (Team from $25 per month for up to 10 developers, as of September 2026), and note that snyk sbom export is limited to Enterprise plans. CRACI vs Snyk

3. Endor Labs

Endor Labs is built around function-level reachability on direct and transitive dependencies, which it says cuts SCA findings by 92%. Upgrade impact analysis, automated pull requests and Endor Patches handle fixes. It also covers AI SAST, secrets, containers, a Package Firewall, artifact signing and an SBOM Hub with reachability-based VEX.

Best for: teams whose main problem is dependency alert volume. Consider if: you are fine with sales-led pricing; beyond the free Developer tier, Core and Pro are priced per contributing developer (as of September 2026). CRACI vs Endor Labs

4. GitHub Advanced Security

GitHub sells Secret Protection (secret scanning and push protection) and Code Security (CodeQL, Copilot Autofix, dependency review). Both build on the dependency graph and Dependabot, which every GitHub plan includes, and artifact attestations add signed provenance at SLSA v1.0 Build Level 2.

Best for: teams already on GitHub that want fewer vendors. Consider if: you are on a Team or Enterprise plan, which private repositories need, and per-committer pricing fits ($19 and $30 per active committer per month, as of September 2026). CRACI vs GitHub Advanced Security

5. Socket

Socket analyzes what packages do: install scripts, network and filesystem access, obfuscated code, malware and typosquats. It comments on pull requests that add risky dependencies, and Socket Firewall blocks malicious packages at install, with a free version for npm, yarn, pnpm, pip, uv and cargo. It also offers reachability analysis.

Best for: teams that want deeper malicious-package defense than a general suite. Consider if: you also need SBOMs; export is in beta on the Business plan and up. CRACI vs Socket

6. Checkmarx One

Checkmarx One is a broad AppSec platform: SAST, SCA, secrets, IaC, API security, DAST, containers and malicious package protection, with an ASPM layer on top. Its SCA uses exploitable path analysis, and it can block a build automatically when a known malicious package shows up in your dependency tree.

Best for: organizations that want breadth similar to Aikido from an enterprise AppSec vendor. Consider if: quote-based pricing works for you; there were no published prices as of September 2026. CRACI vs Checkmarx One

7. Mend.io

Mend AppSec pairs Mend SCA, which traces the call graph through transitive dependencies for reachability, with Mend SAST for more than 30 languages. It enforces license policies, flags malicious packages, produces SPDX and CycloneDX SBOMs, and scans containers and infrastructure as code. Mend Renovate keeps dependencies current across 90+ package managers.

Best for: teams that want SCA, SAST and automated dependency updates from one vendor. Consider if: per-developer pricing fits; Mend AppSec is listed at up to $1,000 per contributing developer per year (as of September 2026). CRACI vs Mend.io

8. Semgrep

Semgrep sells three products: Semgrep Code for SAST, Semgrep Supply Chain for SCA, and Semgrep Secrets. Supply Chain classifies findings as reachable, conditionally reachable or unreachable, checks licenses against your policy, detects malicious dependencies and exports CycloneDX SBOMs. It runs in GitHub Actions, GitLab CI/CD, Jenkins, Bitbucket, CircleCI, Buildkite, Azure Pipelines and Semaphore.

Best for: teams that want to write their own SAST rules and pair them with reachable SCA. Consider if: you want to buy products one at a time. The free plan covers up to 10 contributors and 10 repositories; Teams starts at $30 per contributor per month for Code or Supply Chain and $15 for Secrets (as of September 2026).

9. Trivy (open source)

Trivy is a free Apache-2.0 scanner for container images, filesystems, repositories, virtual machine images and Kubernetes. It finds vulnerabilities, IaC misconfigurations, secrets and licenses, writes CycloneDX and SPDX SBOMs, and runs as a CLI, a GitHub Action or a Kubernetes operator.

Best for: a free baseline for images, IaC and secrets in any CI. Consider if: you can do without a dashboard and triage workflow, or build them yourself. For source targets it reads lock files, so a repository without one can return few or no components. CRACI vs Trivy

Side by side

"GitHub AS" is GitHub Advanced Security together with the dependency graph, Dependabot and artifact attestations it builds on. "Not stated" means the capability is not described in the vendors' documentation, not that it is missing. Aikido's cloud posture, DAST and runtime protection are not in the table: the sources for the other options do not describe equivalents, apart from Trivy's Kubernetes scanning.

When to stay with Aikido

• You want one tool and one triage view for code, dependencies, cloud and running applications.
• Your compliance focus is SOC 2 or ISO 27001, with reports and sync to platforms such as Drata and Vanta.
• You gate pull requests on critical findings across GitHub, GitLab, Jenkins, Bitbucket or CircleCI.
• You need build evidence too. That is a reason to add CRACI, not to leave Aikido: its CI checks and Safe Chain can run as steps on a CRACI runner.

For more on the build-evidence side, see build-time SBOM generation, CRA compliance and pricing.

Aikido alternatives FAQ

Short answers to the questions teams ask when they compare

Is Aikido free?

Aikido has a free Developer plan, and paid plans start at $350 per month (as of September 2026). Its Safe Chain tool, which blocks known malware in npm and PyPI installs, is free.

What is the best alternative to Aikido?

For the same breadth from an enterprise vendor, look at Checkmarx One or Mend.io. For developer-first scanning, Snyk. For reachability, Endor Labs or Semgrep. For malicious packages, Socket. To stay inside GitHub, GitHub Advanced Security. For a free scanner, Trivy. If you need a record of what each build fetched, CRACI records it from the build itself.

Is there an open-source alternative to Aikido?

Trivy is the closest: a free, Apache-2.0 scanner for vulnerabilities, IaC misconfigurations, secrets and licenses in images, filesystems, repositories and Kubernetes. It has no hosted dashboard or triage workflow, so you build those yourself. Semgrep also has a free plan for up to 10 contributors.

How is Aikido different from Snyk?

Aikido aims for breadth in one dashboard, adding cloud posture, DAST and runtime protection to code and dependency scanning, with paid plans from $350 per month. Snyk is developer-first, with feedback in the IDE, CLI and pull requests, and starts at $25 per month on Team. Snyk's SBOM export needs an Enterprise plan.

Does CRACI replace Aikido?

Not for scanning. CRACI does no SAST, secrets, IaC, cloud, DAST or reachability work. It runs your GitHub Actions builds, records every dependency they fetch in a CycloneDX or SPDX SBOM and enforces an egress policy that fails closed. CRACI has found vulnerable packages that Snyk and Aikido did not report, because their scans were missing the components.