Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs Snyk comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 7, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Red Hat Advanced Cluster Se...
Ranking in Container Security
21st
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
12
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Snyk
Ranking in Container Security
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
48
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (8th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (8th), Cloud Management (15th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Software Development Analytics (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (17th), DevSecOps (2nd), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is 2.1%, down from 2.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Snyk is 5.3%, down from 5.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Snyk5.3%
Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes2.1%
Other92.6%
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Daniel Stevens - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers easy management and container connection with HTTPS, but the support needs to improve
I have experience with the solution's setup in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil and our company has assisted in the development of a cluster in a research department, but we didn't start from scratch because we have IT professionals who have installed Kubernetes across 12 nodes of a cluster and a new environment can be created for a new platform. I also had another setup experience of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes in Portugal where I had to implement the solution in a cluster of 22 computer servers, which was completed with assistance from the IT department of the company. The initial setup process of the solution can be considered as difficult. The setup process involves using the permissions, subnets and range of IPs, which makes it complex. Deploying Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes takes around eight to ten hours for new clusters. The solution's deployment can be divided into three parts. The first part involves OpenStack, where the cluster's resources need to be identified. The second part involves virtualizing assets and identifying other physical assets, for which OpenStack, Kubernetes, or OpenShift are used. The third part of the deployment involves dividing the networks into subnetworks and implementing automation to deploy the microservices using Helm. The number of professionals required for the solution's deployment depends upon the presence of automated scripts. Ideally, two or three professionals are required to set up Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes.
meetharoon - PeerSpot reviewer
Affordable tool boosts code scanning efficiency but faces integration hurdles
The most important feature of Snyk is its cost-effectiveness compared to other solutions such as Check Point. It is easy to consolidate Snyk across multiple entities within a large organization. Additionally, our integration of Snyk into GitHub allows us to automatically scan codebases and identify issues, which has improved efficiency.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It is easy to install and manage."
"Segmentation is the most powerful feature."
"Offers easy management with authentication and authorization features"
"The benefit of working with the solution is the fact that it's very straightforward...It is a perfectly stable product since the details are very accurate."
"The technical support is good."
"The most beneficial security feature of the product revolves around the areas of vulnerability and configuration."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its monitoring feature."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten."
"Snyk performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools."
"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."
"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 valuable aspect is its security capabilities."
"The most valuable features are their GitLab and JIRA integrations. The GitLab integration lets us pull projects in pretty easily, so that it's pretty minimal for developers to get it set up. Using the JIRA integration, it's also pretty easy to get the information that is generated, as a result of that GitLab integration, back to our teams in a non-intrusive way and in a workflow that we are already using."
"Snyk is a developer-friendly product."
"The solution has great features and is quite stable."
"The advantage of Snyk is that Snyk automatically creates a pull request for all the findings that match or are classified according to the policy that we create. So, once we review the PR within Snyk and we approve the PR, Snyk auto-fixes the issue, which is quite interesting and which isn't there in any other product out there. So, Snyk is a step ahead in this particular area."
 

Cons

"I do see that some features associated with the IAST part are not included in the tool, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The tool's command line and configuration are hard for us to understand and make deployment complex. It should also include zero trust, access control features and database connectivity."
"They're trying to convert it to the platform as a source. They are moving in the direction of Cloud Foundry so it can be easier for a developer to deploy it."
"The solution's visibility and vulnerability prevention should be improved."
"The initial setup is pretty complex. There's a learning curve, and its cost varies across different environments. It's difficult."
"The solution lacks features when compared to some of the competitors such as Prisma Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and has room for improvement."
"The solution's price could be better."
"The documentation about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security available online is very limited... So it's very limited to the documentation."
"I think Snyk should add more of a vulnerability protection feature in the tool since it is an area where it lacks."
"There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated."
"There is always more work to do around managing the volume of information when you've got thousands of vulnerabilities. Trying to get those down to zero is virtually impossible, either through ignoring them all or through fixing them. That filtering or information management is always going to be something that can be improved."
"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."
"Snyk's API and UI features could work better in terms of speed."
"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."
"Snyk has several limitations, including issues with Gradle, NPM, and Xcode, and trouble with AutoPR."
"The solution could improve the reports. They have been working on improving the reports but more work could be done."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The pricing model is moderate, meaning it is not very expensive."
"Red Hat offers two pricing options for their solution: a separate price, and a bundled price under the OpenShift Platform Plus."
"We purchase a yearly basis license for the solution."
"It's a costly solution"
"The price of Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes is better than Palo Alto Prisma."
"We do have some missing licenses issues, especially with non-SPDX compliant one, but we expect this to be fixed soon"
"I would rate the pricing of Snyk at two. I'm currently using the free version, which the company offers before buying the full version. So, the price is affordable, especially for an enterprise."
"The price of the solution is expensive compared to other solutions."
"Snyk is an expensive solution."
"Compared to Veracode, Snyk is definitely a cheaper tool."
"For what Snyk offers, it has the best cost-benefit I have ever seen because you're buying the license per user."
"The product's price is okay."
"The pricing is reasonable."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
27%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise4
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business20
Midsize Enterprise8
Large Enterprise21
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I like virtualization and all those tools that come with OpenShift. I also like Advanced Cluster Management and the built-in security.
What needs improvement with Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
From an improvement perspective, I would like to create new policies in the tool, especially if it is deployed for the prevention part, but currently, we need to do it manually. I hear that Palo Al...
What is your primary use case for Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes?
I use the solution in my company for vulnerability management, configuration management, compliance, safety handling, and everything else.
How does Snyk compare with SonarQube?
Snyk does a great job identifying and reducing vulnerabilities. This solution is fully automated and monitors 24/7 to find any issues reported on the internet. It will store dependencies that you a...
What do you like most about Snyk?
The most effective feature in securing project dependencies stems from its ability to highlight security vulnerabilities.
What needs improvement with Snyk?
There are a lot of false positives that need to be identified and separated. The inclusion of AI to remove false positives would be beneficial. So far, I've not seen any AI features to enhance vuln...
 

Also Known As

StackRox
Fugue
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

City National Bank, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
StartApp, Segment, Skyscanner, DigitalOcean, Comic Relief
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat Advanced Cluster Security for Kubernetes vs. Snyk and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
867,497 professionals have used our research since 2012.