Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

CoreOS Clair vs Snyk comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jun 4, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

CoreOS Clair
Ranking in Container Security
27th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
2
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Snyk
Ranking in Container Security
5th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (5th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th), Cloud Management (14th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Software Development Analytics (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (16th), DevSecOps (2nd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of CoreOS Clair is 0.5%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Snyk is 5.5%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Felipe Giffu - PeerSpot reviewer
An operational system, similar to Linux where you can run your applications inside containers
With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers. When you mentioned using Nacula as part of your CI/CD pipeline, it means your application is deployed and managed automatically through the CI/CD process. Containers are used to deploy your application within this pipeline, but CoreOS does not run inside these containers. Instead, CoreOS is the base operating system that supports and manages these containers.
meetharoon - PeerSpot reviewer
Affordable tool boosts code scanning efficiency but faces integration hurdles
The most important feature of Snyk is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions such as Check Point. It is easy to consolidate Snyk across multiple entities within a large organization. Additionally, our integration of Snyk into GitHub allows us to automatically scan codebases and identify issues, which has improved efficiency.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"With CoreOS, you can run your applications inside containers. For example, if you have an application that needs to run on Linux, you can create and install a container. However, it's important to note that you don't install CoreOS inside a container; CoreOS is the host operating system that manages containers."
"CoreOS Clair's best feature is detection accuracy."
"The CLI feature is quite useful because it gives us a lot of flexibility in what we want to do. If you use the UI, all the information is there and you can see what Snyk is showing you, but there is nothing else that you can change. However, when you use the CLI, then you can use commands and can get the output or response back from Snyk. You can also take advantage of that output in a different way. For the same reason, we have been using the CLI for the hard gate in the pipeline: Obtain a particular CDSS score for vulnerability. Based on that information, we can then decide if we want to block or allow the build. We have more flexibility if we use the CLI."
"Snyk is a developer-friendly product."
"Static code analysis is one of the best features of the solution."
"We have integrated it into our software development environment. We have it in a couple different spots. Developers can use it at the point when they are developing. They can test it on their local machine. If the setup that they have is producing alerts or if they need to upgrade or patch, then at the testing phase when a product is being built for automated testing integrates with Snyk at that point and also produces some checks."
"The solution's vulnerability database, in terms of comprehensiveness and accuracy, is very high-level. As far as I know, it's the best among their competitors."
"The customization is excellent."
"Our overall security has improved. We are running fewer severities and vulnerabilities in our packages. We fixed a lot of the vulnerabilities that we didn't know were there."
"It has improved our vulnerability rating and reduced our vulnerabilities through the tool during the time that we've had it. It's definitely made us more aware, as we have removed scoping for existing vulnerabilities and platforms since we rolled it out up until now."
 

Cons

"An area for improvement is that CoreOS Clair doesn't provide information about the location of vulnerabilities it detects."
"It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue."
"The documentation sometimes is not relevant. It does not cover the latest updates, scanning, and configurations. The documentation for some things is wrong and does not cover some configuration scannings for the multiple project settings."
"We have seen cases where tools didn't find or recognize certain dependencies. These are known issues, to some extent, due to the complexity in the language or stack that you using. There are some certain circumstances where the tool isn't actually finding what it's supposed to be finding, then it could be misleading."
"The product is very expensive."
"Offering API access in the lower or free open-source tiers would be better. That would help our customers. If you don't have an enterprise plan, it becomes challenging to integrate with the rest of the systems. Our customers would like to have some open-source integrations in the next release."
"The reporting mechanism of Snyk could improve. The reporting mechanism is available only on the higher level of license. Adjusting the policy of the current setup of recording this report is something that can improve. For instance, if you have a certain license, you receive a rating, and the rating of this license remains the same for any use case. No matter if you are using it internally or using it externally, you cannot make the adjustment to your use case. It will always alert as a risky license. The areas of licenses in the reporting and adjustments can be improve"
"There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated."
"Compatibility with other products would be great."
"I use Snyk alongside Sonar, and Snyk tends to generate a lot of false positives. Improving the overall report quality and reducing false positives would be beneficial. I don't need additional features; just improving the existing ones would be enough."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CoreOS Clair is open-source and free of charge."
"You can get a good deal with Snyk for pricing. It's a little expensive, but it is worth it."
"Their licensing model is fairly robust and scalable for our needs. I believe we have reached a reasonable agreement on the licensing to enable hundreds of developers to participate in this product offering. The solution is very tailored towards developers and its licensing model works well for us."
"Cost-wise, it's similar to Veracode, but I don't know the exact cost."
"Snyk is an expensive solution."
"The price is good. Snyk had a good price compared to the competition, who had higher pricing than them. Also, their licensing and billing are clear."
"The product's price is okay."
"The license model is based on the number of contributing developers. Snyk is expensive, for a startup company will most likely use the community edition, while larger companies will buy the licensed version. The price of Snyk is more than other SLA tools."
"The solution is less expensive than Black Duck."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
19%
Manufacturing Company
12%
Computer Software Company
12%
Performing Arts
9%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CoreOS Clair?
If you work with CoreOS or OpenShift, you don't need to pay for CoreOS separately. When you pay for OpenShift, you get CoreOS included, so you don't need to pay for the operating system separately....
What needs improvement with CoreOS Clair?
It can be improved in its support response. They usually take up to seven days to resolve the issue.
What is your primary use case for CoreOS Clair?
We use the tool to manage and secure the event file system. CoreOS Clair is an operational system that is very similar to Linux and offers benefits to other Linux operating systems. One major advan...
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to find any issues reported on the internet. It will store dependencies that you a...
What do you like most about Snyk?
The most effective feature in securing project dependencies stems from its ability to highlight security vulnerabilities.
What needs improvement with Snyk?
There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated. The inclusion of AI to remove false positives would be beneficial. So far, I've not seen any AI features to enhance vuln...
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

No data available
Fugue
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

eBay, Veritas, Verizon, SalesForce
StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Find out what your peers are saying about CoreOS Clair vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.