Small business▼−20Since September 2026: 70% → 50%, −20 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
50%from 70% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 9 pointsRank 1 of 47, unchanged
3 categories · RankedSemgrep
208Judge labels
52First choices
19Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
3Categories
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
53% in SAST for small business buyers
Rank 1 of 71 in the mid-market standingendorsed leader
4 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 5% of its 63 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Semgrep →By buyer segmentStrongest at small business.
Small business1 of 51
53%70 labels
endorsed leader
Mid-market1 of 71
36%63 labels
endorsed leader
Enterprise5 of 45
4%49 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 Semgrep 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 | 36% | 1 of 71 | 5% | 63 | endorsed leader | ▼−17Since September 2026: 47% → 30%, −17 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked. |
| Software composition analysis | Developer platform | 2% | 11 of 50 | 0% | 6 | under 10 labels · led by Trivy at 31% | ▲+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% | 26 of 70 | 0% | 3 | under 10 labels · led by Aikido Security at 37% |
Movement
Since September 2026, Semgrep moved past the floor in one of three categories: SAST, −17 points to 30%. It held within the floor in the other two.
Best category · SAST · by segment
Mid-market▼−17Since September 2026: 47% → 30%, −17 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked.
30%from 47% in September 2026
Cleared the floor by 6 pointsRank 1 of 65, unchanged
Enterprise▲+3Since September 2026: 2% → 5%, +3 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
5%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 8 pointsRank 5 of 42, unchanged
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SAST | 47% | 30% | ▼−17Since September 2026: 47% → 30%, −17 points. Past the 11-point floor: movement. Read over the models both editions asked. | Moved past the floor | Rank 1 of 71, unchanged |
| 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 23 → 11 of 50 |
| ASPM | 0% | 0% | newNew since September 2026: not ranked then, 0% now. | New this edition | Rank 26 of 70, 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 Semgrep 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 Semgrep 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 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 5 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 3 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 8 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 1 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 2 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 6 |
| Kimi K2 | 4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 7 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 6 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 | 8 |
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
Direct33 labels12
Paraphrase31 labels10
Comparative38 labels18not counted in share
Budget-constrained47 labels24
Scale-constrained22 labels6
Negative37 labels12not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative208 labels in all, every segment counted; 52 of the 82 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.
“Semgrep as the primary scanner across all languages... For most budget-constrained companies, Semgrep OSS + SonarQube Community Edition... is the most commonly recommended starting point” Muse Glimmer 30B · SAST · budget prompt · first choice
“Tools like Semgrep are generally preferred for modern CI/CD because they are lightweight, customizable, and run significantly faster.” GLM 4.7 FlashX · SAST · negative prompt · first choice
“look for developer-friendly alternatives like Semgrep, where rules are written in YAML and read like standard code” Gemini 3.5 Flash · SAST · negative prompt · first choice
“The most common pattern among practitioners is using Snyk for SCA (dependency scanning) + Semgrep for SAST” MiniMax M2.5 · SAST · comparative prompt · first choice
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.
“Semgrep OSS and Bandit are fast and low false-positive for obvious patterns, but miss vulnerabilities that span multiple functions... insufficient as sole nightly security scanners” Muse Glimmer 30B · SAST · negative prompt · soft negative
“Semgrep Community Edition as your only deep security scanner: It can be useful for fast checks and custom rules, but its analysis is limited to a file/function context” GPT-6 Luna · SAST · negative prompt · soft negative
“Checkmarx, Veracode, and Semgrep have all struggled with this because their rule-based engines flag anything that could be a vulnerability” Claude Haiku 4.5 · SAST · negative prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Semgrep, over the 208 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Semgrep was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Semgrep, over the 208 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Semgrep 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 Semgrep. 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 194 of the 208 answers that named Semgrep and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
dev.to115
checkmarx.com105
appsecsanta.com96
aikido.dev85
safeguard.sh66
augmentcode.com61
zeropath.com52
codeant.ai49
corgea.com44
g2.com42
715 of the 715 domain citations in answers naming Semgrep came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
Where Semgrep stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.ShowHide
Search and answers
Where Semgrep stands in Google search beside where it stands in the models' answers.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “sast tool”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “sast tools”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 8,100 a month (“semgrep”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 191 a month
- Organic visits to its site
- about 3,461 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 476 · 63 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 4,217
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
36%
rank 1 of 71 in SAST
First choices
52
across its categories
- Named in
- 208 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 194 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.
What it publishes
ShowHide
What it publishes
ShowHideAddresses on semgrep.dev
1,549
subdomains included
Content
764
counted in the table below
Documentation
617
Product · Integration
81 · 4
| Kind | Pages | Last 90 days | 2025-10 to 2026-09 | Latest | Categories named |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Conference or event | 369 | undated | SAST, SCA | ||
| Blog | 316 | undated | SAST, SCA | ||
| Glossary or explainer | 37 | undated | |||
| Case study | 19 | undated | |||
| Comparison | 11 | undated | |||
| Webinar or virtual event | 8 | undated | SAST | ||
| Template or tool | 2 | undated | |||
| Report or ebook | 1 | undated | |||
| News or press | 1 | undated |
Events in person
Last twelve months
- October 8, 2026SecTor 2026Toronto, Canada · exhibited
- October 7, 2026SecTor 2026Toronto, Canada · exhibited
- October 6, 2026SecTor 2026Toronto, Canada · exhibited
- August 27, 2026Realms of Cyber 2026Brisbane, Australia
As the event pages on semgrep.dev state them, read September 28, 2026.
How it is countedHide how it is counted
Every page semgrep.dev exposes, subdomains included. Kind is read from the address and title. The last 90 days, the latest date and the twelve months count pages by when they were published, from the site's feeds, a date in the address, or the page's own publication date, read from up to a hundred of its most recently changed pages; a page that says only when it last changed is counted in its kind but not in when, so the recent counts are a floor, and a kind none of whose pages gives a publication date reads undated. An event counts as online when its address or title says so (webinar, on demand, virtual or online summit); a conference, summit, trade show, expo or roadshow that does not say so is counted as a conference or event, which on a vendor's site is mostly in person. Read September 29, 2026.
Names read as Semgrep
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Semgrep; a claim can dispute any of them.
Semgrep OSS 5Semgrep Code 2Semgrep Community Edition 2Semgrep Community Edition (CE) 2Semgrep (CLI / Community Edition) 1Semgrep (Community/Free Edition) 1Semgrep (Semgrep Code) 1Semgrep (by Rizzo Labs) 1Semgrep Pro 1Semgrep Team 1
Follow Semgrep
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
Semgrep is its own company.ShowHide
The company
Semgrep is its own company.
ShowHideIn its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- An extensible developer-friendly application security platform that scans source code to surface true and actionable security issues with AI-assisted SAST, SCA, and Secrets Detection solutions.
- For
- Builders and Agents
- Price stated
- Free Edition; Teams; Enterprise semgrep.dev/pricing
- Starting price
- 0 semgrep.dev/pricing
- Free plan or trial
- Try for free semgrep.dev
- Certifications
- GDPRSOC 2
- Customers named
- VantaThinkificAcrisureDropboxFigmaGitLabHashiCorpLyft
- Not stated on the pages read
- Integrations, hosting
What Semgrep's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: semgrep.dev, semgrep.dev/pricing, trust.semgrep.dev, semgrep.dev/products/pro-engine, semgrep.dev/case-studies. 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 Semgrep'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 Semgrep, 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 Semgrep by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Semgrep 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 Semgrep, 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.
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Semgrep is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.ShowHide
Badges
Wins only: a badge exists where Semgrep is ranked in a category's top three this edition. Three sizes, one file each, light and dark; the code is under each.
ShowHideAI models recommend Semgrep first in Static application security testing this edition. Each badge says so in the buyer's words, names the edition, and links to the standing. The next edition issues a new badge; this one stays true as a record of October 2026.
Wide · 320 × 104 Website, beside other badges
Square · 240 × 240 LinkedIn, slides
Compact · 200 × 56 Email signature, footer
Badges read on light and dark pages. Alt text carries the claim, the category, the edition and the index, so it stays a citation where the image does not load.