Software composition analysis · October 2026 Edition
Snyk Open Source vs OWASP Dependency-Track
Seven of fourteen models named Snyk Open Source first on the direct prompt; zero named OWASP Dependency-Track. Snyk Open Source was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and OWASP Dependency-Track by ten and Snyk Open Source carries 55 labels and OWASP Dependency-Track 21, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in one category this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share16%8%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate16%0%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#2#4A position in a field of 17; printed, not drawn.
Labels5521A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, Snyk Open Source reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Mend.io was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Trivy vs Snyk Open Source · Trivy vs OWASP Dependency-Track · Snyk Open Source vs Mend.io
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the software composition analysis page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
Snyk Open SourceFirst choices, of fourteen modelsOWASP Dependency-Track
Direct70
Paraphrase023 against Snyk Open Source
Comparative70
Budget-constrained021 against Snyk Open Source
Scale-constrained10
Negative005 against Snyk Open Source
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where Snyk Open Source and OWASP Dependency-Track stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | | | ||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | | |
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | |||
| Grok 4.1 Fast | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | |||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | | | | |
| Kimi K2 | | | | | ||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | | ||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | | | | | |
| GPT-6 Luna | | | | | ||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | | |
Snyk Open Source OWASP Dependency-Track first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, Snyk Open Source on the left and OWASP Dependency-Track on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where Snyk Open Source and OWASP Dependency-Track stood in it.
Snyk Open Source first, OWASP Dependency-Track an alternative
7 of 14 modelsOWASP Dependency-Track was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniSnyk Open Source alternatives: FOSSA, OWASP Dependency-Check, OWASP Dependency-Track
Grok 4.1 FastSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io, Sonatype Lifecycle
DeepSeek V4 FlashSnyk Open Source alternatives: Mend.io, Sonatype Lifecycle
Kimi K2Mend.io, Snyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub Advanced Security, GitHub Dependabot, Sonatype Lifecycle, Trivy
GLM 4.7 FlashXGitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Open Source alternatives: Black Duck, Endor Labs, FOSSA, Mend.io, Sonatype Lifecycle
MiniMax M2.5Snyk Open Source, Sonatype Lifecycle alternatives: Black Duck, FOSSA, GitHub Advanced Security
GPT-6 LunaSnyk Open Source alternatives: GitHub's built-in supply-chain tools, Mend.io, Sonatype Lifecycle
Neither was the first choice, one was named
5 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Mend.io alternatives: Black Duck, Endor Labs, FOSSA, Snyk Open Source, Sonatype Lifecycle
Gemini 3.5 FlashAikido Security alternatives: Endor Labs, Mend.io, Snyk Open Source
Perplexity SonarMend.io alternatives: Black Duck, Snyk Open Source, Sonatype Lifecycle
Qwen 3.7 FlashMend.io alternatives: GitHub Advanced Security, Snyk Open Source
Muse Glimmer 30BMend.io alternatives: Snyk Open Source, Sonatype Lifecycle
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Mistral SmallMend.io alternatives: GitHub Advanced Security, Insignary Clarity
Llama 4 MaverickMend.io
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
Snyk Open Source leads by thirty-eight points.
Snyk Open Source39%#1 of 14OWASP Dependency-Track2%#– of 14Mid-marketThe figures above
Snyk Open Source leads by eight points.
Snyk Open Source16%#2 of 17OWASP Dependency-Track8%#4 of 17Enterprise
Level: the same share of first choices.
Snyk Open Source5%#5 of 14OWASP Dependency-Track5%#6 of 14What the models said about Snyk Open Source
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“enterprise buyers often cite "unpredictable ballooning costs"... some procurement models recommend avoiding it if strict cost-prediction budgets are required” Qwen 3.7 Flash · negative prompt · soft negative
“Snyk is proprietary software. A mid-sized B2B company might prefer Trivy or Dependency-Check to avoid vendor lock-in and licensing costs” GLM 4.7 FlashX · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
“limited policy flexibility, poor data quality for complex remediations, high false positives in transitives, and costs spike” Grok 4.1 Fast · negative prompt · soft negative
“Choose Snyk if you want a seamless developer experience with early vulnerability detection and integrated security scanning.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · comparative prompt · first choice
“Choose Snyk if you have a budget and want the best developer-first integration and workflow tools.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · comparative prompt · first choice
“Start with Snyk for most mid-market B2B due to its balance, high adoption, and dev-centric design” Grok 4.1 Fast · direct prompt · first choice
What the models said about OWASP Dependency-Track
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Three of four in this category shown.
“If you asked me to pick one for a mid-sized B2B company, I'd choose: Dependency-Track for centralized visibility and governance” GPT-5.4 mini · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“OWASP Dependency-Track and Scanmycode.io are the top choices due to their open-source nature and lack of ongoing costs.” Mistral Small · budget prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: OWASP Dependency-Track + Trivy (or Grype)” DeepSeek V4 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
Also compared
Trivy vs Snyk Open SourceTrivy vs OWASP Dependency-TrackSnyk Open Source vs Mend.ioSnyk Open Source vs OWASP Dependency-CheckSnyk Open Source vs GitHub DependabotSnyk Open Source vs Sonatype LifecycleSnyk Open Source vs GitHub Advanced SecurityMend.io vs OWASP Dependency-TrackOWASP Dependency-Track vs OWASP Dependency-CheckOWASP Dependency-Track vs GitHub DependabotOWASP Dependency-Track vs Sonatype LifecycleOWASP Dependency-Track vs GitHub Advanced SecurityAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full SCA standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.