IT AI Index

Index › Vendors › GitLab Dependency Scanning · September 2026 Edition

GitLab · 1 category · Named, not ranked

GitLab Dependency Scanning

20Judge labels

0First choices

2Negative labels

9 of 12Models named it

1Category

September 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table vv2026-09.2, every buyer segment counted.

Standing

5 labels, too few to rank

A product needs 10 labels in a category before a share or quadrant is stated. GitLab Dependency Scanning was named 5 times in SCA, where Trivy led with 40%. The labels and the evidence are below, counted exactly.

By buyer segmentRead the same way at every buyer size.

Small business21 of 50

under the label threshold

Mid-market23 of 49

under the label threshold

Enterprise15 of 49

under the label threshold

In sca · 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 GitLab Dependency Scanning 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
Software composition analysis	Developer platform	0%	23 of 49	0%	5	under 10 labels · led by Trivy at 40%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for GitLab Dependency Scanning yet. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated GitLab Dependency Scanning across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	0	0
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	0	0
Mistral Small	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	0	0
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	1
Kimi K2	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	1

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

Direct6 labelsNone

Paraphrase1 labelNone

Comparative6 labelsNone

Budget-constrained1 labelNone

Scale-constrained4 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative20 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 0 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.

“If you're already using GitLab for source control and CI, the built‑in Dependency Scanning can be the most cost‑effective way to get started” MiniMax M2.5 · SCA · direct prompt · alternative

“Integrated into GitLab workflows, supports SBOM and license compliance, self-hosted option available.” Mistral Small · SCA · 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.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as GitLab Dependency Scanning, over the 19 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and GitLab Dependency Scanning was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Snyk Open Source18 of 1910Not in the top three

Black Duck16 of 192Not in the top three

Sonatype Lifecycle14 of 191Not in the top three

Mend.io12 of 190Not in the top three

FOSSA7 of 190Not in the top three

GitHub Advanced Security7 of 190Not in the top three

JFrog Xray6 of 190Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Check6 of 190Not in the top three

Trivy6 of 190Not in the top three

GitHub Dependabot5 of 192Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. 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 GitLab Dependency Scanning. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 10 of the 19 answers that named GitLab Dependency Scanning and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

expertinsights.com6

endorlabs.com5

guideflow.com5

ox.security5

toolradar.com5

cycode.com4

dupple.com4

appsecsanta.com3

res.cloudinary.com3

aikido.dev2

Forty-two of the forty-two domain citations in answers naming GitLab Dependency Scanning came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

expertinsights.com/application-security/the-top-software-composition-analysis-tools6

ox.security/blog/software-composition-analysis-and-sca-tools5

toolradar.com/blog/best-software-composition-analysis-tools5

dupple.com/learn/best-software-composition-analysis-tools4

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools-05b7a4

guideflow.com/blog/software-composition-analysis-tools4

cycode.com/blog/top-enterprise-sca-tools3

res.cloudinary.com/snyk/image/upload/v1731508416/website-pdfs/The-Forrester-Wave-Software-3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as GitLab Dependency Scanning

What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as GitLab Dependency Scanning; a claim can dispute any of them.

GitLab 1GitLab (Dependency Scanning) 1GitLab SCA 1GitLab Ultimate 1

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 GitLab Dependency Scanning'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 GitLab Dependency Scanning, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at gitlab.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.