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 Jan 11, 2026

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
19th
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
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
51
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (16th), Application Security Tools (6th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (6th), GRC (4th), Cloud Management (10th), Vulnerability Management (15th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (1st), Software Development Analytics (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (12th), DevSecOps (2nd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd), AI Security (11th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.0%, down from 2.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Snyk is 4.3%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Snyk4.3%
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes2.0%
Other93.7%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at Galley
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.
Abhishek-Goyal - PeerSpot reviewer
Software Engineer at a computer software company with 11-50 employees
Improves security posture by actively reducing critical vulnerabilities and guiding remediation
Snyk's main features include open-source vulnerability scanning, code security, container security, infrastructure as code security, risk-based prioritization, development-first integration, continuous monitoring and alerting, automation, and remediation. The best features I appreciate are the vulnerability checking, vulnerability scanning, and code security capabilities, as Snyk scans all open-source dependencies for known vulnerabilities and helps with license compliance for open-source components. Snyk integrates into IDEs, allowing issues to be caught as they appear in the code dynamically and prioritizes risk while providing remediation advice. Snyk provides actionable remediation advice on where vulnerabilities can exist and where code security is compromised, automatically scanning everything and providing timely alerts. Snyk has positively impacted my organization by improving the security posture across all software repositories, resulting in fewer critical vulnerabilities, more confidence in overall product security, and faster security compliance for project clients. Snyk has helped reduce vulnerabilities significantly. Initially, the repository had 17 to 31 critical and high vulnerabilities, but Snyk has helped manage them down to just five vulnerabilities, which are now lower and not high or critical.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"I am impressed with the tool's visibility."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"It is easy to install and manage."
"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."
"The customization is excellent."
"I find SCA to be valuable. It can read your libraries, your license and bring the best way to resolve your problem in the best scenario."
"Snyk's focus on security is a valuable feature. Also Snyk supports multiple programming languages, which has positively affected my security practices. I use only two or three languages, and when I change the language in a file, it detects it in the same suite. I find the AI-powered scanning overall beneficial.Using Snyk's AI-powered scanning, I can detect around ten or twenty errors in my project with about twenty thousand lines of code, so it helps improve my project by identifying a lot of potential vulnerabilities."
"Snyk has positively impacted my organization by improving the security posture across all software repositories, resulting in fewer critical vulnerabilities, more confidence in overall product security, and faster security compliance for project clients."
"The most valuable features are their GitLab and JIRA integrations. The GitLab integration lets us pull projects in pretty easily, so that it's pretty minimal for developers to get it set up. Using the JIRA integration, it's also pretty easy to get the information that is generated, as a result of that GitLab integration, back to our teams in a non-intrusive way and in a workflow that we are already using."
"Static code analysis is one of the best features of the solution."
"The dependency checks of the libraries are very valuable, but the licensing part is also very important because, with open source components, licensing can be all over the place. Our project is not an open source project, but we do use quite a lot of open source components and we want to make sure that we don't have surprises in there."
 

Cons

"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"The testing process could be improved."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"I do see that some features associated with the IAST part are not included in the tool, making it an area where improvements are required."
"Red Hat is somewhat expensive."
"The deprecation of APIs is a concern since the deprecation of APIs will cause issues for us every time we upgrade."
"It would be great if they can include dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning features. Checkmarx and Veracode provide dynamic, interactive, and run-time scanning, but Snyk doesn't do that. That's the reason there is more inclination towards Veracode, Checkmarx, or AppScan. These are a few tools available in the market that do all four types of scanning: static, dynamic, interactive, and run-time."
"The product could be improved by including other types of security scanning (e.g. SAST or DAST), which is important."
"It would be ideal if there was customization with a focus on specific cybersecurity areas or capabilities."
"Snyk's API and UI features could work better in terms of speed."
"Scalability has some issues because we have a lot of code and its use is mandatory. Therefore, it can be slow at times, especially because there are a lot of projects and reporting. Some UI improvements could help with this."
"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."
"Basically the licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"We tried to integrate it into our software development environment but it went really badly. It took a lot of time and prevented the developers from using the IDE. Eventually, we didn't use it in the development area... I would like to see better integrations to help the developers get along better with the tool. And the plugin for the IDE is not so good. This is something we would like to have..."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"It's a costly solution"
"Compared to Veracode, Snyk is definitely a cheaper tool."
"It's inexpensive and easy to license. It comes in standard package sizing, which is straightforward. This information is publicly found on their website."
"Cost-wise, it's similar to Veracode, but I don't know the exact cost."
"Pricing-wise, it is not expensive as compared to other tools. If you have a couple of licenses, you can scan a certain number of projects. It just needs to be attached to them."
"I didn't think the price was that great, but it wasn't that bad, either. I'd rate their pricing as average in the market."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"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."
"With Snyk, you get what you pay for. It is not a cheap solution, but you get a comprehensiveness and level of coverage that is very good. The dollars in the security budget only go so far. If I can maximize my value and be able to have some funds left over for other initiatives, I want to do that. That is what drives me to continue to say, "What's out there in the market? Snyk's expensive, but it's good. Is there something as good, but more affordable?" Ultimately, I find we could go cheaper, but we would lose the completeness of vision or scope. I am not willing to do that because Snyk does provide a pretty important benefit for us."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
28%
Computer Software Company
8%
Government
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise22
 

Questions from the Community

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.
What advice do you have for others considering Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
The tool's policy management supports our company's compliance efforts since any corporate entity or enterprise must follow specific regulations, which include periodic analysis and configuration r...
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, Snyk AppRisk
 

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: March 2026.
884,933 professionals have used our research since 2012.