AppSec and SCA Pricing Compared: What Drives Cost Versus Snyk, Wiz, Vanta, Aikido, Semgrep and Open Source

Buyers ask five cost questions in different words, and the honest answers are shorter than most vendor pages suggest. Here they are up front, each one expanded further down. Everything about a competitor's price comes from that vendor's own public pricing page, read on 28 Oct 2026, and every figure can change. Where a vendor does not publish a number, this post says "see their pricing page" instead of guessing.

1. How does Safeguard pricing compare with Snyk, Wiz and Vanta at the same size? Only partly, because two of the three do not publish prices. Snyk shows one entry price for its Team plan and a public credit rate card for Enterprise. Wiz and Vanta show no dollar amounts on their pricing pages and ask you to request a quote. Safeguard lists individual, team, API and compliance add-on plans on its pricing page and quotes Business, Enterprise and Sovereign on a call; see safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans. A like-for-like comparison at a given size needs a written quote from each vendor for the same scope, and the checklist near the end of this post tells you what to put in that request.

2. Which is cheaper for AppSec: Snyk, Aikido, Semgrep or Safeguard? It depends on how many developers you have and which products you switch on. For a team of up to 10, the published entry points are low across the board: Semgrep's Free Edition is $0 for up to 10 contributors, Snyk Team starts at $25 per month, and Safeguard has a Free plan for piloting (see safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans). Past 10 people the units diverge (per contributor per product, per bundle of users, per user), so the cheapest vendor changes with your headcount and scope. Section 2 puts the published competitor numbers side by side and explains what to ask Safeguard for.

3. Why does Snyk get expensive past 50 developers, and what are the cheaper options? Snyk's public page does not say that it does, and this post will not claim it. What the page does show is that the Team plan is for teams of up to 10 developers, that Enterprise pricing is "Contact Sales," and that Enterprise is metered in credits per active contributor per day, per product. Bills grow with contributor count times the number of products enabled, and the page does not say how daily metering rolls into an annual commitment. Section 4 explains the mechanics and lists the other options, including the ones that publish a per-contributor price.

4. Is open source SCA good enough, or do I need a paid tool? For many teams, open source is enough to find known vulnerable dependencies. OWASP Dependency-Check, Trivy, Grype and OWASP Dependency-Track are real, maintained, widely used tools. The cost moves from a license line to engineering time: running the pipeline, keeping vulnerability data fresh, triaging noise and writing the fixes yourself. Section 5 is a straight look at where each one stops.

5. What is the cost of a managed or white-label Safeguard for MSSPs? Partner margin is tiered: about 20% on Safeguard-branded sales during a 90-day evaluation with no commitment, and 30% plus white label once you commit to an annual target. Full terms are in the partner agreement.

How to read this post

Cost comparisons in security are slippery. The tools are not equivalent, so a cheaper price can buy less. The pricing units differ, so a per-contributor number and a per-bundle number cannot be compared without a headcount. And several large vendors publish no prices at all. This post reports, per vendor, what the public pricing page showed on 28 Oct 2026, separates the cost drivers so you can model your own bill, gives arithmetic only where the published unit makes it honest, and describes open source SCA fairly. Prices on a public page are list prices; real contracts include discounts, commits, marketplace purchasing and multi-year terms.

Question 1: How does Safeguard pricing compare with Snyk, Wiz and Vanta at the same size?

Start with what each vendor is, because "the same size" means different things for each.

• Snyk is a developer-first application security platform: open source dependencies, first-party code, containers and infrastructure as code, with newer AI security products. The natural size unit is the developer.
• Wiz is a cloud security platform. Its natural size unit is the cloud environment: workloads, accounts, subscriptions. The pricing page does not state the unit, so this post does not name one.
• Vanta is a compliance automation platform. Its natural size unit is the organization and the frameworks it needs: SOC 2, ISO 27001 and so on.
• Safeguard is a software supply chain security platform with SCA, SAST, DAST, SBOMs, reachability analysis, autonomous remediation and a compliance suite. The natural unit is the developer or user for application security, the framework for compliance, and the call for API usage.

These products overlap, but they do not substitute for each other one for one. "What do I pay at 100 engineers" is really one of three questions: what AppSec tooling costs for 100 developers, what compliance automation costs for a company that size, or what cloud posture costs for the estate. The sections below take them in turn.

What each pricing page showed on 28 Oct 2026

Two things stand out. First, only Snyk, Aikido, Semgrep and Safeguard show any dollar figure, and Wiz and Vanta show none. Second, even among those that do, the units differ, which is why the next section builds a driver table instead of a ranking.

Comparing at a given size, honestly

If your goal is to compare Safeguard with Snyk at 25 developers, the published numbers do not let you finish the sum. Snyk's Team plan caps at 10 developers, so 25 developers means an Enterprise quote that is not public. If your goal is to compare Safeguard with Wiz, the unit is different in kind: Wiz prices a cloud estate, and Safeguard prices developers, calls and frameworks. If your goal is to compare Safeguard with Vanta for compliance, the Safeguard side is on its pricing page (framework add-ons priced per framework per year, plus a startup rate) and the Vanta side requires a quote. Chasing a number that neither side published produces false precision. The better move is to ask both vendors for a written quote against the same scope, then compare totals over the same term.

How Safeguard prices compliance

Because Vanta publishes nothing, here is only the structure of the Safeguard side. Compliance frameworks are sold as per-framework annual add-ons to a plan, with bundles for common combinations such as SOC 2 plus ISO 27001, a startup rate for very small companies, and audit engagements priced separately. The full library of 373 frameworks is included with Enterprise and Sovereign. See safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans and figures. Safeguard is SOC 2 Type I and Type II audited, and its report is available on request through the Trust Center.

If you are weighing Vanta against Safeguard on compliance, the honest framing is that Vanta is a dedicated compliance platform with its own ecosystem and auditor relationships, and its own page lists framework and questionnaire features that Safeguard's suite may cover differently. Ask both for the same scope in writing: frameworks, number of people, integrations, audit, and renewal terms.

The cost-driver table: per developer, per repository, add-ons and usage

This is the core of the post. Every row is what the vendor's own page shows on 28 Oct 2026. "Not shown" means the page did not state it, not that the vendor does not charge for it.

What the table tells you

Per-developer pricing is not one thing. Snyk and Semgrep both define the billable person by commits to a private repo in the last 90 days. That definition matters: contractors, a build bot with a service account, or a developer who committed once in a year all can count. Ask each vendor whether bots, forks, public repos and inactive accounts are counted.

Per-product multiplication is the quiet driver. Semgrep lists Code and Supply Chain as separate per-contributor products, and Snyk's rate card meters each product separately. A team that turns on three products pays the per-contributor rate for each one. A flat or bundled model, such as Aikido's user bundles or Safeguard's per-user Team plans, changes the shape of that math.

Add-ons decide the final number for compliance tools. Vanta's page marks several features as add-ons, which is common in compliance software. The only way to know the total is to ask for a quote that lists every add-on you need, and to ask what each costs at renewal.

Usage-based items are where surprises happen. Credits, AI fix quotas, API calls, test limits and scan quotas are all usage. Know which of them are metered, which are capped, and what happens when you hit the cap: a block, a throttle or an overage charge.

Question 2: Which is cheaper for AppSec: Snyk, Aikido, Semgrep or Safeguard?

The answer changes with scale. Safeguard figures are not printed here (see safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans), so the arithmetic below covers the competitor that publishes a clean per-contributor unit, and then explains how to model the rest.

Semgrep list prices at 10, 25 and 50 contributors

These figures use only Semgrep's published unit prices, read on 28 Oct 2026. They are monthly list prices before any discount, and they assume every contributor is billable.

Notes on the table:

• Semgrep's Free Edition covers Code and Supply Chain for up to 10 contributors and 10 private repos. At 10 people the cheapest answer may be free.
• Snyk and Aikido are not in the table because their published units do not allow the same arithmetic. Snyk's Team plan is capped at 10 developers and shows "starting at $25 per month" without stating the unit, and Enterprise is not public. Aikido shows 300 per month (Basic) or 600 per month (Pro and Advanced) for a bundle that includes 10 users, and larger bundles are quoted on request.
• Safeguard's Team plans are priced per user per month, and the individual plans are flat per account. Ask which usage allowances apply to each Team rung before you choose between them, then multiply the per-user rate on safeguard.sh/pricing by your headcount to complete the same table.

What the arithmetic leaves out

1. Coverage differs. Semgrep Code is first-party SAST and Supply Chain is SCA with reachability, as its page presents them. Snyk covers open source, code, containers and infrastructure as code. Aikido bundles a wide set of scanners, including cloud posture, into per-bundle plans. Safeguard covers SCA, SAST, DAST, SBOMs, reachability and autonomous remediation, with fix pull requests as its signature output. A lower price is not a better deal if it leaves a category you need uncovered.
2. Fixing is not equal. A scanner that files tickets costs developer time on every finding. A tool that opens fix pull requests, with your own CI deciding the merge, changes the labor math. Both Snyk and Semgrep offer AI-assisted remediation on their own pages, so the question is depth, review model and policy control, not whether the feature exists. Run a pilot on your own repos and count the fixes that merge without edits.
3. The plan ceiling. Free and low tiers carry caps on repos, scans and AI actions. A team that fits inside the cap pays nothing. A team that exceeds it jumps tiers.
4. Contract terms. Annual versus monthly billing, marketplace purchasing (Aikido lists AWS and Azure), renewal caps and multi-year commitments all move the effective price. Safeguard's page states "no surprise add-ons at renewal"; ask every vendor for the equivalent commitment in writing.

A fair summary of the four

• Snyk is the most widely deployed developer-first platform in this group, with a broad product set and a public credit rate card for Enterprise. It is a strong choice where its breadth and ecosystem matter. For published low-end pricing, it shows only the Team plan's starting price.
• Aikido presents as a consolidated platform for smaller teams, with bundled plans, a free tier and a startup discount (up to 30% off, with eligibility limits on the page). Its bundle pricing is simple to model at small user counts.
• Semgrep is the most transparent on per-contributor pricing and has a generous free edition for 10 contributors. Its pricing grows linearly per product, so a team using several products should model it product by product.
• Safeguard publishes plans, API usage and compliance add-ons on one page, includes a Free plan for piloting, and prices Team plans per user. It quotes Business and above on a call, so large-scale comparisons need a quote. See safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans.

None of this says one tool is cheaper at every size. Free tiers and single-purpose tools can beat any platform on price for a narrow need.

Question 3: Why does Snyk get expensive past 50 developers, and what are the cheaper options?

The premise deserves care. Snyk's pricing page does not say anything about 50 developers, and the page does not list an Enterprise price. What can be said, from the page as of 28 Oct 2026, is how the pricing is structured, and why structure like that tends to produce bills that grow faster than headcount.

What Snyk's page shows

• Free: $0 per month, with limits such as 5 projects and 100 Snyk Code tests per month.
• Team: "Starting at $25 / month," billed monthly, "for development teams of up to 10 developers." It adds higher test limits, a Jira integration and next business day support, with 100 projects and 1,000 Snyk Code tests per month.
• Enterprise: "Contact Sales for pricing." A platform subscription with pre-purchased credits usable across any Snyk capability, plus premium support and services (no price shown).
• Rate card: 1 credit equals $1. The card lists Code and Open Source at 1.0 credits, IaC at 0.33, Secrets at 0.66, Evo AI-SPM at 0.66, and Container at 0.33 per monitored image. API and Web is 3.0 per provisioned target. Evo ADS (Coding Agent Security) is 1.0 per active machine, and Evo COS (AI Pentesting) is 4,000 credits per assessment. The per-contributor lines are all "per Active Contributor / per Day."
• Contributor definition: the FAQ defines contributing developers as those who committed to a private repo monitored by Snyk in the last 90 days.

Why a bill like this can climb

Three mechanics, all visible on the page, interact:

1. Contributors times products. Each product in the rate card meters per contributor. Turning on Code, Open Source, IaC and Secrets for the same developer sums four rates, not one.
2. A 90-day window. Anyone who commits to a monitored private repo in the last 90 days counts. Seasonal contributors, contractors, platform engineers with commits in many repos and service accounts can inflate the number.
3. Credits are a pooled currency. Credits are flexible, which is useful, but a pooled balance also makes it harder to tell which team or product is driving spend unless you tag usage.

The page does not say how a daily credit rate translates into an annual commitment. A worked total from the card alone would therefore be a guess, and this post does not offer one. If you are modeling a Snyk renewal, ask for the formula in writing: how active contributors are averaged over a term, what the minimum commit is, how unused credits roll over, and how overage is priced.

Cheaper options, by situation

The right alternative depends on why the bill is a concern.

For a longer look at the market, the Safeguard blog has a Snyk competitors map, a Snyk free plan and limits explainer, and head-to-head posts on Snyk versus Aikido and Snyk versus Wiz.

Question 4: Is open source SCA good enough, or do I need a paid tool?

Often it is good enough to answer "what known-vulnerable dependencies do we have?" It is less often good enough to answer "which of them matter, who fixes them, and how do we prove it to an auditor?" The tools below deserve a respectful, specific look. Each fact comes from the project's own repository or documentation, read on 28 Oct 2026.

OWASP Dependency-Check

Dependency-Check identifies the use of known vulnerable components. It ships as a command-line tool and as plugins for Maven, Gradle, Ant and Jenkins, and its repository states it is licensed under Apache 2.0. It matches dependencies to Common Platform Enumeration identifiers and then to vulnerability data.

What it does well: it is free, it is a long-standing fit for Java and Maven shops, and it runs offline once its database is populated.

What to plan for, from the project's own documentation:

• NVD data and rate limits. Since version 9.0.0 (January 2024) it uses the NVD API rather than the data feed. The project says that without an NVD API key, updates "will be extremely slow," and that a single key shared across many builds can hit the rate limit and return 403 errors. For CI it says to use a caching strategy.
• Upgrades. The project notes breaking changes to the local database in 11.0.0, which triggers a full NVD download, and says an upgrade is mandatory for 12.1.0 and later because of NVD API changes. Pinned versions in old pipelines can quietly stop updating.
• Experimental analyzers. Some analyzers are experimental and "may produce more false positive and false negative rates."
• External tools. Several ecosystems depend on tools present on the build host, such as dotnet, Go, npm or pnpm, and Bundler Audit.
• Matching method. Because matching goes through CPE identifiers, results need human review. Safeguard's blog has a how-to on auditing Spring Boot dependencies with Dependency-Check and Snyk that shows the triage work in practice.

Trivy

Trivy is maintained by Aqua Security and licensed under Apache 2.0. Its repository describes scanning of container images, filesystems, remote Git repositories, virtual machine images and Kubernetes clusters, for known vulnerabilities, IaC misconfigurations, secrets and software licenses, and it can inventory packages as an SBOM. Its documentation also lists an SBOM scan target.

What it does well: it is one binary covering many targets, it is a common default in container pipelines, and it is easy to start with in CI. For a team that mainly needs container and filesystem scanning, it covers a lot for no license fee.

What to plan for: the pages read did not describe reachability analysis, automated fix pull requests, or a central multi-project portfolio view, so those are work you do around it. Safeguard's blog has a Trivy and Grype comparison for detail.

Grype

Grype is an Apache 2.0 vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems from Anchore. Its repository says it scans images, filesystems and SBOMs, supports OS and language packages across common ecosystems, accepts Syft-generated SBOMs, offers EPSS, KEV and risk scoring, and supports OpenVEX for filtering results.

What it does well: scanning an existing SBOM is fast, the EPSS and KEV prioritization is useful out of the box, and VEX support helps document decisions about findings.

What to plan for: it is a scanner, so inventory, ownership, ticketing and remediation live elsewhere.

OWASP Dependency-Track

Dependency-Track is the one in this group built for portfolio management rather than single scans. Its documentation describes an API-first component analysis platform that consumes and produces CycloneDX SBOMs and VEX, tracks component usage across applications, and integrates with the NVD, GitHub Advisories, Sonatype OSS Index, Snyk, Trivy, OSV and VulnDB. It adds EPSS and a policy engine with global and per-project policies for security, license and operational risk. The repository states Apache 2.0 licensing.

What it does well: it is the closest open source answer to "show me every application that contains this component," and the policy engine gives you gates without a license fee. Pairing it with a scanner such as Trivy or Syft that produces CycloneDX SBOMs is a common pattern.

What to plan for:

• You run it. It is a server application with a database and an API. The pages read did not state database or resource requirements, so check the deployment documentation for your scale.
• Version change. The repository says version 4 is in maintenance mode on the 4.14.x branch, with end of life in December 2026, about six months after version 5 general availability. If you adopt it now, plan for the version 5 migration.
• You supply the SBOMs. It analyzes SBOMs you upload. Something else must generate them for each repository and build.
• Triage and fixing stay with you. It reports and gates. The pages read did not describe reachability analysis or automated fix pull requests.

What "enough" looks like

Open source SCA is enough when most of these are true:

• Your main need is a list of known vulnerable dependencies and container packages, with a CI gate.
• You have platform or security engineers who will own the pipeline, upgrades and data feeds.
• You can tolerate some noise, or have time to triage it.
• Fixing is already a developer habit, with Renovate or Dependabot style upgrades in place.
• No customer or auditor requires specific evidence you cannot produce from your own reports.

It is not enough, on its own, when:

• You need to prioritize by reachability. The four tools above are described, on their own pages, in terms of known vulnerabilities, EPSS and KEV. Whether a vulnerable function is actually called is a separate analysis. Safeguard's reachability analysis is built for that question.
• Nobody has time to write the fix. A report with 400 findings is not a fix. Pull request automation is the difference between a list and a reduction in risk.
• You need one place for many teams. Dependency-Track gives you a portfolio view, but you build the ingestion, access control and ticketing around it.
• Compliance wants evidence. SOC 2, ISO 27001 and similar frameworks ask for continuous evidence, ownership and exception handling. Open source tools produce findings, not an audit trail.

The hidden cost: a simple model

A free license is not a free program. Here is a model you can fill in with your own numbers. The inputs below are illustrative assumptions, not benchmarks.

On those illustrative assumptions, the people cost alone is $27,000 per year. Compare that with a team plan at your headcount, using the per-user rate on safeguard.sh/pricing and the competitor rates above. The point is not that either number wins. It is that the open source side deserves a line item, and so does the time to write fixes. For more on this framing, see Safeguard's open source versus commercial SCA and total cost of ownership for SCA platforms posts, and the open source vulnerability management tools comparison.

A hybrid that many teams use

You do not have to pick one. A common pattern is to keep Trivy or Grype in CI as a fast, local, free gate, and use a platform for prioritization, remediation and evidence. Safeguard's Free plan (see safeguard.sh/pricing for its current limits) makes it possible to pilot the platform side on a few repositories without a purchase.

Question 5: What is the cost of a managed or white-label Safeguard for MSSPs?

Partner margin is tiered: about 20% on Safeguard-branded sales during a 90-day evaluation with no commitment, and 30% plus white label once you commit to an annual target. Full terms are in the partner agreement.

When to choose each option

Fair comparisons name where each option fits. Here is a short guide, with Safeguard last.

Choose Snyk when your developers already know it, you want the broadest developer-first product set from one established vendor, or you need its specific integrations. Plan for an Enterprise quote past 10 developers and ask for the credit conversion formula in writing.

Choose Aikido when you are a small or mid-sized team that wants one bundled price covering code, cloud and some attack surface tools, and the user-bundle model fits your headcount. Check the plan limits on repos, images and domains against your estate.

Choose Semgrep when first-party code analysis with custom rules is the priority, you value published per-contributor pricing, and your team is small enough to use the free edition or large enough to negotiate Enterprise volume pricing.

Choose Wiz when your main problem is cloud posture and risk across accounts and workloads. It is a different category from dependency scanning, and its pricing page asks you to request a quote.

Choose Vanta when compliance automation, a questionnaire workflow and its auditor ecosystem are the core need. Its pricing page asks you to request a personalized quote, and several features are marked as add-ons.

Choose open source when you have the engineering time, your needs are scanning and gating, and you are comfortable owning triage and upgrades. Dependency-Track plus a scanner is a credible foundation for a mature platform team.

Choose Safeguard when you want supply chain security, SCA, SAST, DAST and a compliance suite on one platform, with plans listed on a public pricing page, a free plan to pilot, and fixes delivered as pull requests your CI tests, rather than tickets. It also fits buyers who cannot send source code to a third party: the local runner scans on your machine and pushes only encrypted results, and Zero AI mode runs the platform with no language model in the loop. See bring your own model. Larger organizations should plan on a Business or Enterprise quote.

Evaluation checklist: how to get a comparable quote

Copy this into your procurement tracker. It works for any vendor on this page.

Define the scope once, then send it to everyone

• Number of developers, including contractors and bots with commit access.
• Number of repositories, container images and deployed services.
• Products needed: SCA, SAST, secrets, containers, IaC, DAST, runtime, compliance.
• Frameworks needed and the audit window.
• Deployment constraints: SaaS region, private VPC, on-prem, or fully air-gapped as a custom engagement.

Ask each vendor, in writing

• How is a billable user or contributor defined? Are bots, forks, public repos and inactive accounts counted?
• Which products are priced separately, and what does each cost at my headcount?
• What are the caps on repositories, scans, AI actions and API calls, and what happens when I hit one?
• What are the add-ons I will need in year one, and what do they cost?
• What is the price at renewal? Is there a written cap on increases?
• What are the exit terms mid-contract, and how do I export my data?
• Is marketplace purchasing available, and does it change the price?
• What does a pilot cost, and what is the paid conversion path?

Run a pilot on your own repositories

• Pick three to five repositories that represent your stack.
• Compare findings on the same commit across tools.
• Measure noise: the share of findings a developer dismisses.
• Measure fixes: how many fix pull requests merge without edits.

Model the total

• List price times headcount, plus add-ons, plus usage, plus support.
• Add engineering time for any tool you operate yourself.
• Compare totals over the same term, including year two.

Fix it without waiting for upstream

Whatever the vulnerability, most of the risk sits in two gaps. The first is the time between a fix being published and that fix actually running in your production builds. The second, and worse, is the time before any fix exists at all, while a maintainer works out a patch and a release schedule. Waiting through both gaps is a habit, not a requirement. Safeguard gives teams three ways to close them.

1. Autonomous remediation: pull requests, not tickets

When a fixed version exists, Griffin, Safeguard's security model, opens a policy gated pull request that moves the affected dependency to the safe version, and your own CI runs your tests on it before anyone merges. You can run it on one repository or in bulk across every project that carries the vulnerable version. Remediation categories include dependencies, licenses, security posture and findings, and each one is set separately. Reachability analysis ranks the vulnerable code paths your application actually calls first, so the first pull requests you merge are the ones that matter most. Auto-merge is a separate switch and stays off by default, so your team decides what merges on its own and what still needs a human approval.

2. Gold Open Source: the safe version in seconds, free

gold.safeguard.sh is free and needs no login. Search any CVE or package to see affected and fixed versions, CVSS, EPSS, CISA KEV status and a recommended safe version, or use the "Am I affected?" checker. The same data is available through a free read API, README status badges and RSS threat feeds.

3. Gold Registry: start from components that are already fixed

Safeguard Gold rebuilds patched versions of open-source packages and images from source, signs each build, attaches an SBOM, SLSA provenance and VEX, and serves them from registry.safeguard.sh to your organization. Every Gold artifact is held continuously to zero exploitable critical or high CVEs and a completed license check, with signed build provenance (signed with Safeguard's key and verifiable with cosign, SLSA Build Level 3 as the design target) and a public evidence page you can hand to an auditor. An artifact loses its Gold badge if it regresses. Teams can point their own package directory at the registry so hardened equivalents resolve without changing how developers install anything.

When upstream has no fix yet, or will not ship one, Safeguard first works to get the fix accepted upstream. If the issue is severe or upstream will not move, Safeguard builds a fork, fixes the vulnerability there and publishes a hardened Gold build, so you are not stuck on a maintainer's release schedule. You can also request a hardened build of a specific package. Ask which packages it covers before you plan around it.

One honest limit: when the vulnerable code lives in a vendor appliance, a hosted service or an operating system runtime you do not build yourself, the fix still has to come from that vendor or distribution. The steps above apply to the open source dependencies and container images you build and ship, which is where most teams carry the largest and least tracked share of their exposure.

Frequently asked questions

Does Snyk publish its pricing? Partly. As of 28 Oct 2026 its plans page shows a Free plan at $0, a Team plan "starting at $25 / month" for up to 10 developers, and a public Enterprise credit rate card where 1 credit equals $1. Enterprise totals are "Contact Sales."

Does Wiz publish prices? No. As of 28 Oct 2026 its pricing page shows plan names (Wiz One, Wiz Go and À la Carte) and a pricing request form, with no dollar amounts. See their pricing page.

Does Vanta publish prices? No. As of 28 Oct 2026 its pricing page lists plan names and features, marks some features as add-ons, and offers a demo and personalized pricing. See their pricing page.

What does Semgrep cost? As of 28 Oct 2026 its pricing page shows a Free Edition at $0 for up to 10 contributors, Teams starting at $30 per contributor per month for Code or Supply Chain and $15 for Secrets, and custom Enterprise pricing.

What does Aikido cost? As of 28 Oct 2026 its pricing page shows a free Developer plan, Basic at 300 per month and Pro and Advanced at 600 per month, each as a total for a bundle that includes 10 users, and tailored Enterprise pricing. The extracted page showed no currency symbol next to those plan prices, so confirm the currency and the price for your user count with Aikido.

What does Safeguard cost? See safeguard.sh/pricing for current plans. The page lists a Free plan, individual plans, per-user Team plans and per-framework compliance add-ons, and quotes Business, Enterprise and Sovereign on a call.

Are Trivy, Grype, Dependency-Check and Dependency-Track really free? Their licenses carry no fee: the repositories read for this post state Apache 2.0 for Dependency-Check, Trivy, Grype and Dependency-Track. The cost is operating them: infrastructure, vulnerability data access such as an NVD API key, upgrades and triage time.

Can I use open source and a paid tool together? Yes, and many teams do. A fast open source scanner in CI gives a local gate, and a platform adds prioritization, fix pull requests, portfolio views and compliance evidence. Pilot the platform on a few repositories while the scanner stays in place.

What does a managed or white-label Safeguard cost for an MSSP? Partner margin is tiered: about 20% on Safeguard-branded sales during a 90-day evaluation with no commitment, and 30% plus white label once you commit to an annual target. Full terms are in the partner agreement.

Summary

The cheapest tool is the one whose pricing unit matches how you grow, whose caps you will not hit, and whose output you will not have to redo by hand. Whatever you pick, get a written quote against a written scope, run a pilot on your own repositories, and compare year-two totals, not just year-one list prices. To see how Safeguard fits, start with the free plan on the pricing page and run it next to your current scanner on a few repositories.