Arcis vs Snyk
Snyk is a developer-security platform: it scans your dependencies, your code, and your containers for known issues. Arcis is runtime middleware that blocks attacks while your app is serving traffic. They overlap on supply-chain and static-analysis scanning; they don't overlap on runtime defense.
TL;DR
Snyk tells you what's vulnerable in your code and dependencies before you ship. Arcis blocks the attacks that exploit those vulnerabilities (and many more) at runtime, after you ship. The two are complementary, not substitutes. Arcis includes a CLI scanner (arcis sca, arcis audit, arcis scan) so small teams can get baseline supply-chain + static-analysis coverage without buying a platform, but it's narrower than Snyk's full product.
Where Snyk wins
- Mature, deep static analysis. Snyk Code is a well-funded SAST product with a vulnerability database curated by a security research team. For deep multi-language SAST, they're the established option.
- Vulnerability database breadth. Snyk maintains its own vulnerability research program. Their database catches issues that haven't propagated to public sources yet.
- IDE + PR integration. Their JetBrains and VS Code plugins, and their GitHub PR checks, are polished.
Where Arcis wins
- Runtime defense. Snyk shows you risks. Arcis blocks attacks live. If a previously-unknown bypass shows up in production, Snyk has nothing to say; Arcis sanitizes and blocks at the request boundary.
- Bundled CLI + middleware. Arcis ships
arcis sca(supply-chain scanner) andarcis audit/arcis scan(static analysis) alongside the runtime middleware. Small teams get baseline coverage from one tool. Snyk requires a separate platform plus the runtime defense you'd source from somewhere else. - MIT, fully open source. Snyk's free tier has tight limits and the substantive features (Snyk Code, container scanning, IaC) are paid. For a solo dev or early-stage team, Arcis covers more ground without a vendor commitment.
Capability matrix
Comparison reflects public state of both projects as of 2026-05-10.
| Capability | Snyk | Arcis |
|---|---|---|
| Category | Developer security platform (SAST + SCA + container + IaC) | Runtime middleware + bundled CLI scanner |
| Runtime defense | No | Yes (20+ vectors blocked at request boundary) |
| Supply chain scanner | Yes (best-in-class breadth) | Yes (arcis sca, narrower DB but free) |
| Static analysis (SAST) | Yes (Snyk Code, deep) | Yes (arcis audit, 23 rules) |
| Container / IaC scanning | Yes | No |
| Vulnerability research team | Yes | No (community + public sources) |
| IDE integration | Yes (polished) | Roadmap |
| License | Commercial (limited free tier) | MIT, open source |
| Languages covered (runtime) | N/A (no runtime) | Node, Python, Go (full parity) |
| Best fit | Mid-to-large engineering orgs needing a security platform | Solo devs, small teams, projects that want zero-config runtime defense |
How to choose
This isn't really a head-to-head. The honest framing: most teams should run both. Snyk in CI to catch issues before deploy, Arcis at runtime to block attacks against the issues that slip through (or that haven't been disclosed yet).
If you have to pick one and your blast radius is small (solo dev, side project, early-stage startup), pick Arcis. You get a baseline of supply-chain + static-analysis scanning plus live runtime defense, all under MIT.
If you have a security budget and an engineering org, pay for Snyk for its database and IDE depth, and use Arcis as the runtime defense that Snyk doesn't provide.
Bottom line
Snyk scans. Arcis defends. They don't replace each other. The only real overlap is the CLI scanners, where Arcis is "good enough free" and Snyk is "deep and paid". Use both if you can.
← Previous: Arcis vs Aikido Zen · Next: Arcis vs Cloudflare WAF →