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

SUSE NeuVector 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

Snyk
Ranking in Container Security
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (17th), Application Security Tools (7th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (9th), GRC (4th), Cloud Management (12th), Vulnerability Management (15th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Software Development Analytics (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (13th), DevSecOps (3rd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd), AI Security (11th)
SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (20th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of February 2026, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Snyk is 4.4%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 1.9%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Snyk4.4%
SUSE NeuVector1.9%
Other93.7%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

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.
Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Managing Director at ProQuanta
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"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."
"Snyk provides a lot of information on vulnerabilities, the packages being used, and their dependencies, giving good insight into the security of those packages."
"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."
"Its reports are nice and provide information about the issue as well as resolution. They also provide a proper fix. If there's an issue, they provide information in detail about how to remediate that issue."
"The solution has great features and is quite stable."
"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 performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The tool's deployment is simple. Also, I am impressed with its risk capabilities."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
 

Cons

"We have to integrate with their database, which means we need to send our entire code to them to scan, and they send us the report. A company working in the financial domain usually won't like to share its code or any information outside its network with any third-party provider."
"Snyk has several limitations, including issues with Gradle, NPM, and Xcode, and trouble with AutoPR."
"For the areas that they're new in, it's very early stages for them. For example, their expertise is in looking at third-party components and packages, which is their bread-and-butter and what they've been doing for ages, but for newer features such as static analysis I don't think they've got compatibility for all the languages and frameworks yet."
"There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated."
"Generating reports and visibility through reports are definitely things they can do better."
"Although Snyk is strong, sometimes it flags vulnerabilities that are not reachable, not exploitable, and not relevant to a project."
"Snyk's API and UI features could work better in terms of speed."
"Technically, we have better vulnerabilities detection in Checkmarx and Veracode. Both of them are more precise about vulnerabilities detection."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"However, I found that the support in Egypt was not very qualified, and there was a need to upgrade to a higher support layer to solve my issues."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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 product's price is okay."
"Presently, my company uses an open-source version of the solution. The solution's pricing can be considered quite reasonable owing to the features they offer."
"It is pretty expensive. It is not a cheap product."
"We are using the open-source version for the scans."
"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."
"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."
"Snyk is a premium-priced product, so it's kind of expensive. The big con that I find frustrating is when a company charges extra for single sign-on (SSO) into their SaaS app. Snyk is one of the few that I'm willing to pay that add-on charge, but generally I disqualify products that charge an extra fee to do integrated authentication to our identity provider, like Okta or some other SSO. That is a big negative. We had to pay extra for that. That little annoyance aside, it is expensive. You get a lot out of it, but you're paying for that premium."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
14%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
9%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business21
Midsize Enterprise9
Large Enterprise21
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
 

Questions from the Community

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...
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features be...
What is your primary use case for NeuVector?
In my company, I am looking to deploy a container security runtime solution.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Fugue, Snyk AppRisk
NeuVector
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
Find out what your peers are saying about SUSE NeuVector vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.