Every category where a model named Grype 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%	15 of 49	7%	14	accepted challenger
Container and Kubernetes security	Cloud and infrastructure	0%	23 of 78	20%	5	under 10 labels · led by Aqua Security at 18%

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Grype 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 Grype across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	Alternative	Mention	Negative	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	1	0	0	1
Gemini 3.5 Flash	1	0	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1	2
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	1	1	3
Mistral Small	1	0	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	2	0	0	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	0	0
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	3	0	0	3
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	0	3
MiniMax M2.5	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

Direct0 labelsNone

Paraphrase19 labelsNone

Comparative3 labelsNone

Budget-constrained8 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative7 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative37 labels in all, every segment counted; 0 of the 1 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.

“utilize their modern stateless CLI tools, Syft (for SBOM generation) and Grype (for vulnerability scanning)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · Container security · negative prompt · alternative

“Low FPs (6/41), SBOM-native | Slower (2min+), pair needed | Already using Anchore ecosystem” Grok 4.1 Fast · SCA · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Container-focused teams | Lower false positives, purely focused on vuln matching” DeepSeek V4 Flash · SCA · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“Combine Grype + Syft if you: Want the most accurate vulnerability detection” Kimi K2 · SCA · budget 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.

“Build-time scanners like Trivy, Grype, and Clair can find CVEs and misconfigurations, but they do not detect runtime threats.” Perplexity Sonar · Container security · negative prompt · soft negative

“Less broad (focuses on containers/images, pair with Syft for SBOM/SCA)” Grok 4.1 Fast · SCA · budget prompt · soft negative

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Grype, over the 37 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Grype was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Trivy36 of 3718Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Check23 of 374Not in the top three

OSV-Scanner18 of 371Not in the top three

Syft14 of 370Not in the top three

Snyk Open Source13 of 375Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Track9 of 373Not in the top three

Falco8 of 372Not in the top three

Kubescape5 of 371Not in the top three

Black Duck5 of 370Not in the top three

Prisma Cloud5 of 370Not 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 Grype. 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 31 of the 37 answers that named Grype and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

appsecsanta.com26

safeguard.sh23

aikido.dev19

endorlabs.com17

guideflow.com14

cve.optibot.re12

ox.security11

github.com10

expertinsights.com9

snyk.io8

149 of the 149 domain citations in answers naming Grype came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appsecsanta.com/sca-tools/open-source-sca-tools23

aikido.dev/blog/top-open-source-dependency-scanners16

appsecsanta.com/sca-tools16

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools-05b7a16

safeguard.sh/resources/blog/open-source-vulnerability-management-tools-compared13

cve.optibot.re/blog/owasp-dependency-check-trivy-grype-snyk-202612

safeguard.sh/resources/blog/best-open-source-sca-tools-in-2026-tested-on-a-real-monorepo10

guideflow.com/blog/dependency-scanning-software9

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as Grype

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

Grype (Anchore) 3Grype (+Syft) 1Grype (by Aqua Security) 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 Grype'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 Grype, 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 grype.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.