Snyk vs SonarQube

Two fact sheets from our own research, side by side — pricing, platforms, API access and status re-checked by us rather than quoted from the vendors.

The short answer

Cheaper paid plan: Snyk — $25/mo vs $34/mo for SonarQube
Free plan: Both have one
Public API: Both have one
Best fit: Snyk: Small teams that want dependency and container scanning in the pull request without a security hire · SonarQube: Teams shipping large volumes of AI-generated code
Platforms: Snyk: Web, VS Code extension, Linux · SonarQube: Web, Linux, Windows

From our own records as of each tool's last check. Anything we have not confirmed is left out rather than guessed. How we verify

SnykDeveloper security scanning for code and dependencies

SonarQubeStatic analysis across 40+ languages, now aimed at checking AI-written code before it reaches a pull request.

Side by side

Fact	Snyk	SonarQube
Category	AI Security & Model Protection	Code Review & Quality
Pricing model	Freemium	Freemium
Starts at	$25/mo	$34/mo
Public API	Yes	Yes
Trust score	90 / 100	91 / 100
Platforms	Web, API, VS Code extension, Linux	Web, Linux, Windows
Company	Snyk Limited	SonarSource Sarl
Launched	2015	—
Last verified	Sep 6, 2026	Sep 6, 2026

What our research says

Snyk

Snyk earns its place on the free tier for any small team that ships open-source dependencies and containers: the scanner lives in the IDE and the pull request, and the fix-PR workflow is what gets findings closed rather than filed. The commercial cliff is steep — Team is a flat self-serve plan that stops at ten developers, and everything above that, including every AI-branded Evo feature, is a credit-based enterprise contract priced per contributor per day.

Pros

Free tier includes code, dependency, container and IaC scanning with IDE and CLI integrations
Fix pull requests close findings instead of listing them
Published rate card makes enterprise credits legible: 1 credit = $1 per contributor per day for Code or Open Source
Founded 2015, with a decade of vulnerability data behind the scanner

Cons

Free Code scanning is capped at 100 tests a month, which a busy repository exhausts quickly
Team stops at 10 developers and shows no annual price
All Evo AI capabilities require an Enterprise subscription
Enterprise credits are prepaid for the contract term and overage is invoiced in arrears

SonarQube

The established static-analysis platform repositioned around AI-written code, and the repositioning is more than marketing: analysing during generation and using cached project context for cross-file bugs are the two things single-file review bots genuinely miss. The catch is that the AI agents sit on top of a platform you have to adopt wholesale, and the free tier's 50k-line cap runs out quickly on a real repo.

Pros

30 to 40-plus languages under one quality profile
Agentic analysis catches issues during generation rather than after the PR
Cross-file bug detection via a cached project index, which single-file checkers miss
Remediation agent verifies its own fixes before opening a pull request
Free tier never expires and integrates with GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps and Bitbucket

Cons

Free tier caps private projects at 50,000 lines of code
$34/month Team plan only suits teams under 50 developers; above that it is Enterprise on quote
SonarQube Server pricing lives on a separate page and is not published alongside Cloud
The AI features assume you have adopted the wider Sonar platform

Which one fits

Choose Snyk if you need

Small teams that want dependency and container scanning in the pull request without a security hire
Developers who want fixes proposed as PRs rather than a vulnerability list
Organisations on GitHub, GitLab or Jira that need SCA, SAST and IaC from one vendor

Choose SonarQube if you need

Teams shipping large volumes of AI-generated code
Organisations that need one quality gate over both human and AI code
Polyglot codebases spanning many languages