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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes 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

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
15th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
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 Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.3%, down from 3.0% 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

Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve
I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
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

"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"The technical support is good."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"One of the most valuable features I found was the ability of this solution to map the network and show you the communication between your containers and your different nodes."
"There are many valuable features. For example, the way the scanning feature works. The integration is cool because I can integrate it and I don't need to wait until the CACD, I can plug it in to our local ID, and there I can do the scanning. That is the part I like best."
"The code scans on the source code itself were valuable."
"What is valuable about Snyk is its simplicity."
"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 has given us really good results because it is fully automated. We don't have to scan projects every time to find vulnerabilities, as it already stores the dependencies that we are using. It monitors 24/7 to find out if there are any issues that have been reported out on the Internet."
"The solution's Open Source feature gives us notifications and suggestions regarding how to address vulnerabilities."
"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 product's most valuable features are an open-source platform, remote functionality, and good pricing."
 

Cons

"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The support and specifications need to be up to date for the cluster technologies"
"The testing process could be improved."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"The solution's price could be better."
"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."
"There is always more work to do around managing the volume of information when you've got thousands of vulnerabilities. Trying to get those down to zero is virtually impossible, either through ignoring them all or through fixing them. That filtering or information management is always going to be something that can be improved."
"Snyk should improve the scanning capabilities for other languages. For example, Veracode is strong with different languages such as Java, C#, and others."
"Could include other types of security scanning and statistical analysis"
"It would be helpful if we get a recommendation while doing the scan about the necessary things we need to implement after identifying the vulnerabilities."
"The tool should provide more flexibility and guidance to help us fix the top vulnerabilities before we go into production."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"The solution's reporting and storage could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"It's a costly solution"
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"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."
"We are using the open-source version for the scans."
"The solution is less expensive than Black Duck."
"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."
"I would rate the pricing of Snyk at two. I'm currently using the free version, which the company offers before buying the full version. So, the price is affordable, especially for an enterprise."
"It's inexpensive and easy to license. It comes in standard package sizing, which is straightforward. This information is publicly found on their website."
"On a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the pricing a three. It is a cheap solution."
"You can get a good deal with Snyk for pricing. It's a little expensive, but it is worth it."
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
24%
Computer Software Company
12%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.
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...
 

Also Known As

StackRox
Fugue
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
860,592 professionals have used our research since 2012.