Mend.io vs GitGuardian
Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.
Entry price
Quote on request
Quote onlyFree tier available
Free tierWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Quote-based enterprise pricing, typically per developer or per application.
Free tier covers small teams entirely; business pricing is quote-based per developer.
Free tier
Free tier for small teams on Mend's developer products.
Free for individuals and teams up to 25 developers.
Open source
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Widely used
Mend.io · since 2011
Widely used
GitGuardian · since 2017
Strengths
- Licence compliance reporting is the strongest in the category and often the reason legal approves a release.
- Reachability analysis reduces the transitive-dependency alert flood.
- Automated remediation pull requests.
- Validity checking distinguishes a live credential from a revoked one, which transforms triage priority.
- Scans full commit history, where most leaked secrets actually live.
- Free for teams up to 25 developers.
Limitations
- SAST is weaker than dedicated code-analysis vendors.
- Enterprise pricing and sales process.
- Interface is dated in places.
- Secrets scanning only — not a general security platform.
- Historical scans on old repositories produce a large initial backlog.
- Requires repository access, which needs a security review of its own.
Best for
Enterprises where open-source licence compliance is as important as vulnerability management.
Any organisation with more than a handful of repositories and no secrets scanning today.
All of these integrate with: GitHub, GitLab, Jira.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.