We performed a comparison between Aqua Security Platform and Snyk based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Aqua Security Platform is highly appreciated for its ability to secure container images, identify vulnerabilities, and detect malware. Snyk is acclaimed for being developer-friendly, offering automatic pull request creation and software composition analysis. Aqua Security Platform could improve by automating reporting and log forwarding. Users also complain that it is too resource-heavy. Snyk could focus on improving compatibility and reporting capabilities. Reviewers said that Snyk could automate remediation and simplify functions.
Service and Support: Aqua Security Platform's customer service is generally considered prompt and supportive, but some users reported that they had to fix some issues themselves. Some users said Snyk's customer service should improve the way it organizes and prioritizes support tickets.
Ease of Deployment: Users reported varying levels of difficulty with Aqua's setup process, with some saying the solution required specialized knowledge. Snyk's setup was generally considered straightforward, with some variations depending on specific circumstances.
Pricing: Aqua Security Platform is moderately priced. Snyk is considered expensive, particularly for smaller companies. However, some users said the pricing was manageable for larger enterprises.
ROI: Snyk offers a budget-friendly solution that has the potential to offset annual subscription costs by addressing bugs faster. Users offered limited feedback on the ROI for Aqua Security Platform.
Comparison Results: Our users prefer Snyk over Aqua Security Platform. Users appreciate Snyk's straightforward setup and developer-friendly approach. Snyk offers valuable features like scanning, automatic pull requests, and software composition analysis.
"The CSPM product is great at securing our cloud accounts and I really like the runtime protection for containers and functions too."
"From what I understand, the initial setup is simple."
"We use Aqua Security for the container security features."
"The container security element of this product has been very valuable to our organization."
"Their sandboxing service is also really good."
"Aqua Security allowed us to gain visibility into the vulnerabilities that were present in the container images, that were being rolled out, the amount of risk that we were introducing to the platform, and provided us a look into the container environment by introducing access control mechanisms. In addition, when it came to runtime-level policies, we could restrict container access to resources in our environment, such as network-level or other application-level access."
"The most valuable feature of Aqua Security is the scanner."
"The solution was very user-friendly."
"I think all the standard features are quite useful when it comes to software component scanning, but I also like the new features they're coming out with, such as container scanning, secrets scanning, and static analysis with SAST."
"From the software composition analysis perspective, it first makes sure that we understand what is happening from a third-party perspective for the particular product that we use. This is very difficult when you are building software and incorporating dependencies from other libraries, because those dependencies have dependencies and that chain of dependencies can go pretty deep. There could be a vulnerability in something that is seven layers deep, and it would be very difficult to understand that is even affecting us. Therefore, Snyk provides fantastic visibility to know, "Yes, we have a problem. Here is where it ultimately comes from." It may not be with what we're incorporating, but something much deeper than that."
"I am impressed with the product's security vulnerability detection. My peers in security are praising the tool for its accuracy to detect security vulnerabilities. The product is very easy to onboard. It doesn't require a lot of preparation or prerequisites. It's a bit of a plug-and-play as long as you're using a package manager or for example, you are using a GitHub repository. And that is an advantage for this tool because developers don't want to add more tools to what they're currently using."
"We have integrated it into our software development environment. We have it in a couple different spots. Developers can use it at the point when they are developing. They can test it on their local machine. If the setup that they have is producing alerts or if they need to upgrade or patch, then at the testing phase when a product is being built for automated testing integrates with Snyk at that point and also produces some checks."
"It is easy for developers to use. The documentation is clear as well as the APIs are good and easily readable. It's a good solution overall."
"The product's most valuable features are an open-source platform, remote functionality, and good pricing."
"What is valuable about Snyk is its simplicity."
"The most valuable feature is that they add a lot of their own information to the vulnerabilities. They describe vulnerabilities and suggest their own mitigations or version upgrades. The information was the winning factor when we compared Snyk to others. This is what gave it more impact."
"Sometimes I got stressed with the UI."
"Aqua Security could provide more open documentation so that their learning resources can be more easily accessed and searched through online. Right now, a lot of the documentation is closed and not available to the public."
"Since we are working from home, we would like to have the proper training for Aqua."
"They want to release improvements to their product to work with other servers because now there are more focused on the Kubernetes environment. They need to improve the normal servers. I would like to have more options."
"We would like to see an improvement in the overview visibility that this solution offers."
"The solution could improve user-friendliness."
"I would like Aqua Security to look into is the development of a web security portal."
"There's room for improvement, particularly in management capabilities as it may not be comprehensive enough for all customers, and it has been lacking in the realm of cloud security posture management."
"We tried to integrate it into our software development environment but it went really badly. It took a lot of time and prevented the developers from using the IDE. Eventually, we didn't use it in the development area... I would like to see better integrations to help the developers get along better with the tool. And the plugin for the IDE is not so good. This is something we would like to have..."
"We use Bamboo for CI.CD, and we had problems integrating Snyk with it. Ultimately, we got the two solutions to work together, but it was difficult."
"The documentation sometimes is not relevant. It does not cover the latest updates, scanning, and configurations. The documentation for some things is wrong and does not cover some configuration scannings for the multiple project settings."
"It lists projects. So, if you have a number of microservices in an enterprise, then you could have pages of findings. Developers will then spend zero time going through the pages of reports to figure out, "Is there something I need to fix?" While it may make sense to list all the projects and issues in these very long lists for completeness, Snyk could do a better job of bubbling up and grouping items, e.g., a higher level dashboard that draws attention to things that are new, the highest priority things, or things trending in the wrong direction. That would make it a lot easier. They don't quite have that yet in container security."
"Basically the licensing costs are a little bit expensive."
"I would like to give further ability to grouping code repositories, in such a way that you could group them by the teams that own them, then produce alerting to those teams. The way that we are seeing it right now, the alerting only goes to a couple of places. I wish we could configure the code to go to different places."
"For the areas that they're new in, it's very early stages for them. For example, their expertise is in looking at third-party components and packages, which is their bread-and-butter and what they've been doing for ages, but for newer features such as static analysis I don't think they've got compatibility for all the languages and frameworks yet."
"We have to integrate with their database, which means we need to send our entire code to them to scan, and they send us the report. A company working in the financial domain usually won't like to share its code or any information outside its network with any third-party provider."
Aqua Cloud Security Platform is ranked 6th in Container Security with 16 reviews while Snyk is ranked 5th in Container Security with 41 reviews. Aqua Cloud Security Platform is rated 8.0, while Snyk is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aqua Cloud Security Platform writes "Reliable with good container scanning and a straightforward setup". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". Aqua Cloud Security Platform is most compared with Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, Wiz, Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes, SUSE NeuVector and Sysdig Secure, whereas Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and GitLab. See our Aqua Cloud Security Platform vs. Snyk report.
See our list of best Container Security vendors and best DevSecOps vendors.
We monitor all Container Security reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.