Small business▲+7Since September 2026: 14% → 21%, +7 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
21%from 14% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 4 pointsRank 4 → 1 of 66
Snyk · 1 category · RankedSnyk Container
125Judge labels
18First choices
14Negative labels
14 / 14Models named it
1Category
October 2026 Edition. Every number here is derived from the raw labels under vendor table v2026-10.8, every buyer segment counted.
Best standing
19% in Container security for small business buyers
Rank 7 of 77 in the mid-market standingaccepted challenger
1 of 14 models made it the first choice on the direct prompt; 9% of its 44 labels there were negative.
What the models named instead of Snyk Container →By buyer segmentStrongest at small business.
Small business2 of 74
19%49 labels
accepted challenger
Mid-market7 of 77
5%44 labels
accepted challenger
Enterprise6 of 84
4%32 labels
criticized challenger
In container security · 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 Snyk Container 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Container and Kubernetes security | Cloud and infrastructure | 5% | 7 of 77 | 9% | 44 | accepted challenger | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. |
Movement
Since September 2026, Snyk Container held within the floor in its one category: no change cleared 11 points.
Best category · Container security · by segment
Mid-market▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
6%from 2% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 7 pointsRank 7 → 6 of 68
Enterprise▼−2Since September 2026: 4% → 2%, −2 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked.
2%from 4% in September 2026
Inside the floor by 9 pointsRank 5 → 7 of 71
All categories · Mid-market
| Category | September 2026 | Now | Change | Reading | Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Container security | 2% | 6% | ▲+4Since September 2026: 2% → 6%, +4 points. Inside the 11-point floor: within noise. Read over the models both editions asked. | Within noise | Rank 7 of 77, 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 Snyk Container 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 Snyk Container 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 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 3 |
| GPT-5.4 mini | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Perplexity Sonar | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Grok 4.20 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 5 |
| Mistral Small | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 3 |
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | 0 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 5 |
| Llama 4 Maverick | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 5 |
| Kimi K2 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 4 |
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| MiniMax M2.5 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 0 | 4 |
| GPT-6 Luna | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Muse Glimmer 30B | 0 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
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
Direct27 labels10
Paraphrase1 labelNone
Comparative33 labels8not counted in share
Budget-constrained29 labels3
Scale-constrained20 labels5
Negative15 labels2not counted in share
First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative125 labels in all, every segment counted; 18 of the 28 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.
“Snyk is usually the strongest "best value" starting point for container security” GPT-5.4 mini · Container security · budget prompt · first choice
“Snyk: Developer-first; excels in CI/CD, fix guidance. Great for mid-market.” Grok 4.20 · Container security · scale prompt · first choice
“Choose Snyk if your bottleneck is developers introducing vulnerable code.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Container security · direct prompt · first choice
“Best for developer-centric security, focusing on vulnerability scanning during development and CI/CD pipelines.” Mistral Small · Container security · 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.
“Less focus on runtime protection and Kubernetes posture; more of a scanning/shift-left tool than a full lifecycle security platform” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Container security · comparative prompt · soft negative
“a governance/trust signal for teams that are sensitive to how a vendor handles public research” Muse Glimmer 30B · Container security · negative prompt · soft negative
“as a *container security platform* it's a compromise ... Snyk is not the right primary tool.” DeepSeek V4 Flash · Container security · negative prompt · soft negative
“unlike Snyk (free for open-source devs but per-dev pricing/limits for teams)” Grok 4.20 · Container security · budget prompt · soft negative
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Snyk Container, over the 125 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Snyk Container was named but was not.ShowHide
Named alongside
The products named in the same answers as Snyk Container, over the 125 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Snyk Container 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 Snyk Container. 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 109 of the 125 answers that named Snyk Container and are not a share of its labels.
Domains cited
cyberpress.org75
esecurityplanet.com62
thectoclub.com62
gbhackers.com59
g2.com48
portainer.io46
expertinsights.com43
checkmarx.com42
ox.security38
minimus.io36
511 of the 511 domain citations in answers naming Snyk Container came from somebody else's page.
Pages cited
Pages are listed as the models cited them.
Search and answers
snyk.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Snyk Container takes 5% of first choices and Trivy takes 22%.ShowHide
Search and answers
snyk.io is not in Google's top ten for any of the category's searches. In the answers, Snyk Container takes 5% of first choices and Trivy takes 22%.
ShowHideIn search
Google, US estimatesPosition for “container security platform”
–
not in the top ten
Position for “container security platforms”
–
not in the top ten
- Searches for its name, Google
- 50 a month (“snyk container”)
- AI search demand for its name, est.
- 2 a month
- Its company's site
- snyk.io shared with Snyk's other products; the figures are the site's
- Organic visits to its site
- about 61,651 a month
- Searches its site ranks for
- 15,722 · 963 in the top three
- Sites linking to it
- 21,121
- Paid Google search
- No ads found in the estimate; that does not mean it runs none
In answers
This editionShare of first choices
5%
rank 7 of 77 in container security
Segment leader
22%
Trivy
- First choices
- 18 across its categories
- Named in
- 125 answers
- Its own site cited
- in 109 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 Snyk Container
What the judge wrote, as written, with how often. The vendor table decides that these count as Snyk Container; a claim can dispute any of them.
Snyk 31
Follow Snyk Container
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
Snyk is the company behind Snyk Container.ShowHide
The company
Snyk is the company behind Snyk Container.
ShowHideOn record
Company records- Also from Snyk
- Snyk ASPM, Snyk AppRisk, Snyk Code, Snyk Free Tier, Snyk Learn, Snyk Open Source
In its own words
Stated by the vendor, not checked- Positioning
- Support for scanning Node.js applications that use pnpm as their package manager within container images.
- For
- Users scanning a container image.
- Not stated on the pages read
- Price, starting price, free plan or trial, integrations, certifications, hosting, customers
What Snyk Container's own pages state, read September 28, 2026: updates.snyk.io/container-support-for-pnpm-lockfile-scanning, updates.snyk.io/snyk-container-sbom-generation-cli-support-274219, updates.snyk.io/snyk-container-base-image-recommendation-changes-309186, updates.snyk.io/snyk-container-custom-base-image-recommendations-is-now-ga, updates.snyk.io/snyk-container-improved-public-base-image-recommendation-303771. 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 Snyk Container'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 Snyk Container, 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 Snyk Container by email, built from the raw record of the edition. It shows:
- where Snyk Container 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 Snyk Container, 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.