Every category where a model named OSV-Scanner 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%	16 of 49	0%	13	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for OSV-Scanner 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 OSV-Scanner 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	1	0	1
Perplexity Sonar	0	1	1
Grok 4.1 Fast	1	0	1
Mistral Small	0	0	0
DeepSeek V4 Flash	1	1	2
Llama 4 Maverick	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	1	0	1
Kimi K2	1	1	2
GLM 4.7 FlashX	2	1	3
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

Direct1 labelNone

Paraphrase20 labels1

Comparative2 labelsNone

Budget-constrained3 labelsNone

Scale-constrained0 labelsNone

Negative2 labelsNone

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative28 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 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.

“Top accuracy (39/41 found, 1 FP) | Narrower scope (lockfiles/SBOMs only) | Precision over breadth” Grok 4.1 Fast · SCA · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“ideally used in combination with OSV-Scanner (by Google/GitHub)” Qwen 3.7 Flash · SCA · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“with OSV-Scanner (by Google) as a highly focused alternative” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SCA · paraphrase prompt · alternative

“OSV‑Scanner – High accuracy on OSV data (open‑source, fast).” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SCA · negative 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 OSV-Scanner, over the 28 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and OSV-Scanner was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

Trivy28 of 2816Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Check24 of 282Not in the top three

Grype18 of 280Not in the top three

Snyk Open Source11 of 284Not in the top three

Syft9 of 280Not in the top three

GitHub Dependabot6 of 280Not in the top three

OWASP Dependency-Track5 of 282Not in the top three

Aikido Security4 of 281Not in the top three

Endor Labs4 of 281Not in the top three

FOSSA4 of 280Not 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 OSV-Scanner. 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 25 of the 28 answers that named OSV-Scanner and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

appsecsanta.com23

safeguard.sh22

aikido.dev19

endorlabs.com17

guideflow.com12

cve.optibot.re11

github.com8

ox.security8

toolradar.com8

dupple.com7

135 of the 135 domain citations in answers naming OSV-Scanner came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

appsecsanta.com/sca-tools/open-source-sca-tools21

appsecsanta.com/sca-tools17

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

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

safeguard.sh/resources/blog/best-open-source-sca-tools-in-2026-tested-on-a-real-monorepo16

cve.optibot.re/blog/owasp-dependency-check-trivy-grype-snyk-202611

safeguard.sh/resources/blog/open-source-vulnerability-management-tools-compared11

endorlabs.com/learn/best-sca-tools8

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Names read as OSV-Scanner

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

OSV‑Scanner 3OSV-Scanner (Google) 1OSV-Scanner (by Google) 1OSV-Scanner by Google 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 OSV-Scanner'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 OSV-Scanner, 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 osv.dev 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.