Small business=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 2%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 6 of 47, unchanged
GitHub · 5 categories · RankedGitHub Advanced Security
125Judge labels
7First choices
18Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
5Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
4% in SCA for enterprise buyers
Rank 6 of 71 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
0 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 6% of its 16 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of GitHub Advanced Security →By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.
Small business6 of 51
2%20 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market6 of 71
2%16 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise8 of 45
2%14 labels
criticized challenger
In sast · each standing computed within its segment · bars are 0 to 100 · the accent bar is the product's own best reading
Standing by category
Every category where a model named GitHub Advanced Security for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.
| Category | Function | Share | Rank | Negative rate | Labels | Quadrant | Since September 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Static application security testing | Developer platform | 2% | 6 of 71 | 6% | 16 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Software composition analysis | Developer platform | 2% | 8 of 50 | 6% | 18 | accepted challenger | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Application security posture management | Developer platform | 0% | 30 of 70 | 0% | 2 | under 10 labels · led by Aikido Security at 37% | |
| AI security platforms | Security operations | 0% | 161 of 233 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by SentinelOne Singularity at 11% | |
| SaaS security posture management | Security operations | 0% | 67 of 95 | 0% | 1 | under 10 labels · led by Wing Security at 30% |
Movement
Since September 2026, GitHub Advanced Security held within the floor in all five categories: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · SAST · by segment
Mid-market▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 0% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 9 → 6 of 65
Enterprise=heldSince September 2026: 2% → 3%, ±0 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
3%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 11 pointsRank 7 of 42, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAST | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 9 → 6 of 71 |
| SCA | 0% | 2% | ▲+2Since September 2026: 0% → 2%, +2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 17 → 8 of 50 |
| ASPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 30 of 70, unchanged |
| AI security | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 161 of 233, unchanged |
| SSPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 67 of 95, unchanged |
Shares here are read over the models both editions asked, so they can differ by a point or two from the standing above, which counts every model in this edition.
The floor is 11 points of share, measured: how far the models move a leader on their own when the same questions are asked twice with nothing changed. A larger change is movement; a smaller one is noise, and both are shown. Movement is read over the twelve models both editions asked; GPT-6 Luna, Muse Glimmer 30B joined this edition and are in the standing but not yet in the comparison. How the floor is measured · The editions
By model
How each model treated GitHub Advanced Security across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.ShowHide
By model
How each model treated GitHub Advanced Security across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Fourteen models, six prompts per category.
ShowHide| Model | First choice | Alternative | Mention | Negative | Labels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Grok 4.20 | 0 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Kimi K2 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
By framing
Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.
FramingLabels by classFirst choices
Direct28 labels2
Paraphrase13 labels2
Comparative29 labelsNone
Budget-constrained19 labels2
Scale-constrained20 labels1
Negative16 labelsNone
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative125 labels in all, every segment counted; 7 of the 7 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.
What the models said for it
Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.
“For GitHub\u2011centric teams: Start with GitHub Advanced Security” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SCA · direct prompt · first choice
“Top Recommendation: GitHub Advanced Security (GHAS)” Kimi K2 · SAST · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Dependabot SCA + secret/code scanning from ~$19/user/mo (free for public repos). Native if your workflow is GitHub-centric.” Grok 4.20 · SCA · budget prompt · alternative
“GitHub Advanced Security / CodeQL if your company is deeply GitHub-native and wants SAST in the same platform.” Muse Glimmer 30B · SAST · comparative prompt · alternative
And against it
Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.
“GHAS is expensive and is sold as a bundled suite. If you only want SCA, paying for the entire suite might not make financial sense.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SCA · direct prompt · soft negative
“GHAS is sold as an add-on license that can be quite expensive for a mid-sized B2B budget.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SAST · paraphrase prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitHub Advanced Security, over the 125 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitHub Advanced Security was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as GitHub Advanced Security, over the 125 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitHub Advanced Security was named but was not.
ShowHideProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head
A head-to-head page exists where both products are among a category's top eight. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.
What carried it into the answer
The sites and pages cited by the answers that named GitHub Advanced Security. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.
Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, five of the fourteen in this edition, so these counts come from 111 of the 125 answers that named GitHub Advanced Security and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
guideflow.com55
checkmarx.com52
aikido.dev41
appsecsanta.com38
endorlabs.com36
safeguard.sh33
dev.to32
expertinsights.com32
sonatype.com32
mend.io31
382 of the 382 domain citations in answers naming GitHub Advanced Security came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where GitHub Advanced Security stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where GitHub Advanced Security stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimates- Searches for its name, Google
- 1,300 a month (“github advanced security”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 42 a month
- Its own site
- It sits on GitHub's site (github.com), so there are no site figures for it alone
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
2%
rank 6 of 71 in SAST
Segment leader
36%
Semgrep
- First choices
- 7 across its categories
- Named in
- 125 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 111 of the answers that named it
Search figures are US estimates from DataForSEO, read September 28, 2026; AI search demand is its modeled, directional estimate, not a count of queries to any assistant. The answers are this edition's. Two measurements side by side: neither is read as the cause of the other.
Names read as GitHub Advanced Security
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as GitHub Advanced Security; a claim can dispute any of them.
GitHub Advanced Security (GHAS) 7GitHub Advanced Security (CodeQL) 2GitHub Advanced Security / Dependabot 2Github Advanced Security 2GitHub Advanced Security (including Dependabot) 1GitHub Advanced Security / CodeQL 1GitHub Code Security / CodeQL 1GitHub CodeQL / GitHub code scanning 1
Follow GitHub Advanced Security
An email the morning each edition publishes: where this product moved, where it held, and by how much against the noise floor. One address, confirmed by a click; a stop link in every email.
Already following? Everything you follow, with a stop for each.
The company
GitHub is the company behind GitHub Advanced Security.ShowHide
The company
GitHub is the company behind GitHub Advanced Security.
ShowHideOn record
Company recordsIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- enterprise-grade, built-in application security
- For
- enterprises
- Certifications
- ISOSOC 2GDPR
- Customers named
- SAPOtto GroupSPH MediaPostmates
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, hosting
What GitHub Advanced Security's own pages state, read October 5, 2026: github.com/security. A claimed page can correct any of them.
Is this your product?
Claim this page
Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when GitHub Advanced Security's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as GitHub Advanced Security, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.
What a new claim receivesHide what a new claim receives
A new claim receives the current edition's vendor brief for GitHub Advanced Security by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where GitHub Advanced Security is named, by buyer and by framing, and which cells hold its first choices;
- the claims the models make when they name it, ranked, with the strongest and the weakest quoted;
- its vocabulary against the segment leader's, and the pages the models cited;
- who was chosen in the answers that did not name GitHub Advanced Security, and every reason the record gives;
- a battlecard for each top rival: the head-to-head split, why they win, and the reservation quoted against them;
- one page of published figures cleared to show a buyer.