Mend.io SCA offers a competitive pricing structure that is relatively affordable compared to similar solutions in the market. This makes it an attractive option for organizations looking to enhance their software composition analysis without incurring excessive costs. The setup process for Mend.io is straightforward, allowing teams to get started quickly, educate developers efficiently, and see effective outcomes across the organization in a short timeframe. However, while Mend.io is a powerful and cost-effective solution, our organization has been focused on streamlining various tools to reduce overall expenses related to Static Application Security Testing (SAST), Software Composition Analysis (SCA), container security, and Infrastructure as Code (IaC). As part of this initiative, we are shifting towards a more centralized scanning approach within the GitHub enterprise platform. This transition has led us to consider alternatives that offer both flexibility and cost advantages. In this context, Snyk emerged as a viable option that aligns with our strategic goals. It provides the necessary capabilities while supporting our move toward a more integrated security framework. Despite our decision to explore Snyk, we still believe that Mend.io remains a robust, user-friendly, and affordable solution, particularly for SCA and container security needs. From the perspective about setup costs, pricing, and licensing, it’s essential to consider not only the initial investment but also the long-term value that these tools can provide. Organizations should weigh the benefits of comprehensive features against their budgets and evaluate how well each solution integrates into their existing workflows. Additionally, negotiating longer-term contracts can often yield better pricing terms, which is a strategy worth exploring when considering tools like Mend.io. Most often the vendors offer custom designed pricing based on relationship with their customer and the mutually beneficial current and future value, including brand recognition to future prospects. There is often no one-price-fits-all formula with many enterprise solutions, including Mend.io.
We were one of their biggest customers seven years ago, so we are paying a really good price. Over the last two years, they have tried to add more and more features to their license packages, but the price is a little bit high, comparatively. We are able to do a lot of things with the product, but I can see the price growing and growing and it may be a little bit too expensive now. I really recommend Mend.io. It's a great company. Rami Sass is the CEO and you can ask him questions. They do everything to make their customers comfortable using their solutions.
Mend is costly but not overly expensive. The license was quite expensive this year, but we managed to negotiate the price down to the same as last year. At the same time, it's a good value. We're getting what we're paying for and still not using all the features. We could probably get more out of the tool and make it more valuable. At the moment, we don't have the capacity to do that.
IT Service Manager at a wholesaler/distributor with 51-200 employees
Real User
2022-07-17T14:21:00Z
Jul 17, 2022
We always negotiate for the best price possible, and as far as I know, Mend has done an excellent job with their pricing. Our management is happy with the pricing, which has led to renewals.
Its pricing model is per developer. It depends on the number of developers in the company. The license is for a minimum of 20 developers. So, even if you are a small startup with less than 10 developers, you have to buy a license for 20 developers on a yearly subscription, which makes it quite expensive for startup customers. I provide consultation to startup accelerators. They're small at the beginning, and only once they grow to 20 developers, they can afford this tool. As a result, WhiteSource is missing this target audience. Their licensing is not flexible.
Head of Software Engineering at a legal firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2022-05-10T15:47:00Z
May 10, 2022
The pricing is good. One of the differentiators between them and their competitors is how they priced the product. Some companies price per run and some price per developer or per language. One thing that was nice about WhiteSource is that they didn't have that. They have a fixed cost for contributing developers, but the number of languages is irrelevant. The number of runs is irrelevant, and that's great. That way, you've got a fixed cost and you know it's not going to get any bigger if you start doing more work unless you add more developers. The pricing is clear and useful.
Principal Software Architect at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2021-08-30T10:35:31Z
Aug 30, 2021
I cannot comment on billing, as this was handled by other departments in my previous organization. As we were using an SaaS-based service, the solution must be scalable, although my understanding is that this is based on the licensing model one is using.
Mend.io is a software composition analysis tool that secures what developers create. The solution provides an automated reduction of the software attack surface, reduces developer burdens, and accelerates app delivery. Mend.io provides open-source analysis with its in-house and other multiple sources of software vulnerabilities. In addition, the solution offers license and policy violation alerts, has great pipeline integration, and, since it is a SaaS (software as a service), it doesn’t...
Mend.io SCA offers a competitive pricing structure that is relatively affordable compared to similar solutions in the market. This makes it an attractive option for organizations looking to enhance their software composition analysis without incurring excessive costs. The setup process for Mend.io is straightforward, allowing teams to get started quickly, educate developers efficiently, and see effective outcomes across the organization in a short timeframe. However, while Mend.io is a powerful and cost-effective solution, our organization has been focused on streamlining various tools to reduce overall expenses related to Static Application Security Testing (SAST), Software Composition Analysis (SCA), container security, and Infrastructure as Code (IaC). As part of this initiative, we are shifting towards a more centralized scanning approach within the GitHub enterprise platform. This transition has led us to consider alternatives that offer both flexibility and cost advantages. In this context, Snyk emerged as a viable option that aligns with our strategic goals. It provides the necessary capabilities while supporting our move toward a more integrated security framework. Despite our decision to explore Snyk, we still believe that Mend.io remains a robust, user-friendly, and affordable solution, particularly for SCA and container security needs. From the perspective about setup costs, pricing, and licensing, it’s essential to consider not only the initial investment but also the long-term value that these tools can provide. Organizations should weigh the benefits of comprehensive features against their budgets and evaluate how well each solution integrates into their existing workflows. Additionally, negotiating longer-term contracts can often yield better pricing terms, which is a strategy worth exploring when considering tools like Mend.io. Most often the vendors offer custom designed pricing based on relationship with their customer and the mutually beneficial current and future value, including brand recognition to future prospects. There is often no one-price-fits-all formula with many enterprise solutions, including Mend.io.
It is fairly priced.
We were one of their biggest customers seven years ago, so we are paying a really good price. Over the last two years, they have tried to add more and more features to their license packages, but the price is a little bit high, comparatively. We are able to do a lot of things with the product, but I can see the price growing and growing and it may be a little bit too expensive now. I really recommend Mend.io. It's a great company. Rami Sass is the CEO and you can ask him questions. They do everything to make their customers comfortable using their solutions.
Mend is costly but not overly expensive. The license was quite expensive this year, but we managed to negotiate the price down to the same as last year. At the same time, it's a good value. We're getting what we're paying for and still not using all the features. We could probably get more out of the tool and make it more valuable. At the moment, we don't have the capacity to do that.
We always negotiate for the best price possible, and as far as I know, Mend has done an excellent job with their pricing. Our management is happy with the pricing, which has led to renewals.
I don’t have any information in regards to pricing.
Its pricing model is per developer. It depends on the number of developers in the company. The license is for a minimum of 20 developers. So, even if you are a small startup with less than 10 developers, you have to buy a license for 20 developers on a yearly subscription, which makes it quite expensive for startup customers. I provide consultation to startup accelerators. They're small at the beginning, and only once they grow to 20 developers, they can afford this tool. As a result, WhiteSource is missing this target audience. Their licensing is not flexible.
WhiteSource is a free solution to use.
The pricing is good. One of the differentiators between them and their competitors is how they priced the product. Some companies price per run and some price per developer or per language. One thing that was nice about WhiteSource is that they didn't have that. They have a fixed cost for contributing developers, but the number of languages is irrelevant. The number of runs is irrelevant, and that's great. That way, you've got a fixed cost and you know it's not going to get any bigger if you start doing more work unless you add more developers. The pricing is clear and useful.
When comparing the price of WhiteSource to the competition it is priced well. The cost for 50 users is approximately $18,000 annually.
This is an expensive solution. When setting up this solution, it is important to have clear cut planning and to define the automation rules.
I cannot comment on billing, as this was handled by other departments in my previous organization. As we were using an SaaS-based service, the solution must be scalable, although my understanding is that this is based on the licensing model one is using.
The solution involves a yearly licensing fee.
Pricing is competitive.
The version that we are using, WhiteSource Bolt, is a free integration with Azure DevOps.