Introduction

In modern software security, choosing the right tool can make or break your development and security outcomes. SonarQube and Semgrep are often compared because each improves code security in different ways. Picking the right one impacts everything from coverage of vulnerabilities to CI/CD integration and developer productivity. In this post, we’ll compare SonarQube vs Semgrep on the aspects technical leaders care about – coverage, integrations, developer impact – and show why an alternative called Aikido Security might better address these needs.

TL;DR

Both SonarQube and Semgrep help secure codebases, but each has blind spots. SonarQube is primarily a code quality platform that also does static security scanning (SAST). Semgrep focuses on finding code vulnerabilities with pattern matching. Each leaves gaps: SonarQube emphasizes maintainability (with only basic security rules), while Semgrep hunts bugs but lacks broader coverage. Aikido Security combines both approaches – it offers full-stack scanning (code quality + security) with far fewer false positives and smoother integration. In short, Aikido delivers more complete coverage with less noise, making it a superior choice for modern dev teams.

Overview of Each Tool

SonarQube

SonarQube is a popular platform for continuous code quality inspection that now also includes static application security testing. It started as a tool to catch bugs and code smells, and has evolved to cover common security issues (like OWASP Top 10 vulnerabilities and hardcoded secrets). With support for 20+ programming languages out-of-the-box, SonarQube provides unified visibility into code reliability, maintainability, and security. Developers appreciate SonarQube’s clean web UI and integration into workflows: it hooks into CI pipelines to enforce “quality gates” (preventing merges if code doesn’t meet defined standards). SonarQube offers a free Community Edition, while paid editions add advanced security rules and enterprise features.

Semgrep

Semgrep is a fast, open-source static analysis tool focused on code security. Nicknamed “semantic grep,” it scans code for vulnerable patterns using rules that look like the source code (instead of complex regex). Semgrep supports 30+ programming languages and can run at virtually any stage – in editors, as a pre-commit hook, or in CI pipelines. In practice, teams use Semgrep for SAST: it finds common bugs like SQL injection, XSS, and hardcoded credentials, and it’s easy to extend. There’s a vast library of community-written rules to cover popular frameworks or you can write your own to fit your codebase’s needs. This flexibility and lightweight setup make Semgrep very developer-friendly.

However, by design it analyzes code on a single-file basis, trading deep cross-file analysis for speed. (If an issue spans multiple files and no rule is written to catch that, Semgrep might miss it.) Overall, Semgrep is great for quick, customized security checks, with the caveat that its coverage is only as good as the rules provided.

Feature-by-Feature Comparison

Security Scanning Capabilities

SonarQube and Semgrep are both primarily static code analyzers (SAST) – they scan source code for bugs and security issues. Neither tool provides dynamic scanning (DAST) or built-in software composition analysis (SCA) for open-source library vulnerabilities. SonarQube’s security analysis comes from a set of rules (including OWASP Top 10 checks and secret detection) that run alongside its code quality checks. It will flag issues like SQL injection or XSS in your code, though many findings are marked as “Security Hotspots” that require manual review (to avoid false alarms) rather than outright labeled vulnerabilities. Semgrep, on the other hand, relies entirely on its rule patterns: it can detect a wide range of vulnerabilities (injections, insecure configs, hardcoded secrets, etc.) if you have rules for them.

The community rule set covers a lot of ground, but if a vulnerability isn’t covered by an existing rule (and you haven’t written one yourself), Semgrep will simply not report it. Neither SonarQube nor Semgrep natively scans your open-source dependencies for known CVEs or your running apps for exploits – they focus on static code. They also lack out-of-the-box scanning for infrastructure-as-code templates or container images. In short, both tools secure source code well (each in their own way), but you’ll need additional tools to cover runtime, cloud, or dependency risks outside of code.

Integration & CI/CD Workflow

Integration into development workflows is a strong suit for both tools. SonarQube offers robust CI/CD integration: it has official plugins for Jenkins, Azure DevOps, GitHub Actions, GitLab CI and more, making it straightforward to scan every commit or pull request. Teams commonly use SonarQube’s “quality gate” in CI – if the code analysis fails the defined criteria (e.g. new critical issues introduced), the build can be failed to prevent the merge. SonarQube can also add comments to pull requests, highlighting new issues in the diff, and its server provides a web dashboard for viewing all findings.

‍Semgrep being a lightweight CLI tool can be scripted into any CI pipeline easily, and the Semgrep team provides ready-to-use GitHub Actions and CI integration guides. In fact, Semgrep’s SaaS platform hooks directly into source control (GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket) and CI systems to run scans and then comment on merge requests with results. This means developers see security feedback in the same place they review code – no extra portals to check. Both SonarQube and Semgrep also integrate with IDEs for real-time feedback: SonarQube via the SonarLint plugin (available for popular IDEs like VS Code, IntelliJ, Eclipse), and Semgrep via its editor extensions (VS Code and JetBrains IDEs).

The bottom line: both tools can slot into your workflow, but SonarQube provides a more traditional centralized UI, whereas Semgrep focuses on flexibility (you can use it purely CLI or enable their cloud app for a UI). Either way, you can wire up these tools to run on each pull request and quickly flag issues to developers.

Accuracy and Performance

When it comes to scan performance, Semgrep is notably fast. Its pattern-matching engine can analyze code at 20k–100k lines per second per rule, far outperforming SonarQube’s engine which is reported around 0.4k lines/sec for typical rule sets. In practice this means Semgrep can often scan even large codebases in seconds to a couple minutes, making it feasible to run on every commit without bogging down CI. SonarQube scans tend to be slower and more resource-intensive – running a full Sonar analysis might take a number of minutes (or more for huge projects), partly due to its deeper analysis of code quality metrics and the overhead of uploading results to the SonarQube server.

Accuracy (and noise level) is a tougher comparison, as both tools will report false positives if not tuned, but they handle them differently. Semgrep’s extensive rule library can lead to a high volume of findings out-of-the-box – not all of which are truly urgent problems. Users often cite that Semgrep’s signal-to-noise ratio requires tuning; it can “flood you with alerts that aren’t true problems” if you enable too many rules without filtering. The upside is you can tweak or disable rules easily, but it may take some effort to tune it for your codebase.

‍SonarQube, in contrast, has a more curated ruleset and tries to minimize noise by design. Security rules in SonarQube often have built-in logic to avoid obvious false positives, and the tool explicitly distinguishes between confirmed Vulnerabilities and Security Hotspots (the latter being areas of code that might be a problem, which it leaves to the developer to review). This approach means SonarQube might report fewer total issues – reducing alert fatigue – but it also might miss real issues that fall outside its rule set.

For example, in one test SonarQube failed to flag a straightforward XSS flaw in .NET code, illustrating that its coverage of security patterns is not as exhaustive as one might hope. Semgrep, with the right rules, would catch that XSS (indeed a community Semgrep rule did catch an SSRF issue that SonarQube missed in the same study), yet Semgrep might also flag 10 other potential issues that you then have to investigate, some of which turn out benign. In summary, SonarQube tends to err on the side of precision (fewer false positives, but potentially more false negatives), whereas Semgrep errs on the side of recall (catch more by casting a wide net, but you’ll need to weed out some false alarms).

The best choice depends on whether you prefer a chatty tool that you tune down, or a quieter tool that might leave gaps – and this is exactly where Aikido aims to strike a balance (high signal, low noise).

Coverage and Scope

Language and framework support: SonarQube and Semgrep both cover a wide array of languages, but Semgrep’s range is even broader. SonarQube supports about 20+ languages (all the big ones like Java, C#, JavaScript, Python, C/C++, Ruby, PHP, etc.). Semgrep supports 30+ languages including all those and more (even Go, Rust, Kotlin, Swift, and configurations like Dockerfiles). Both tools can analyze front-end and back-end code, and both support modern mobile app languages (e.g., SonarQube has analyzers for Swift/Objective-C and Kotlin, while Semgrep can scan those as well). If your stack includes an obscure language, SonarQube’s coverage might be something to check – Semgrep’s open architecture has led to many languages being added over time (including niche ones) whereas SonarQube’s support is limited to what SonarSource provides.

Issue types and depth: Aside from languages, SonarQube’s scope extends beyond security – it also reports code quality issues (like duplicated code, complex functions, lacking unit tests, etc.), giving you a holistic view of code health. Semgrep is laser-focused on security and bug-finding; it doesn’t measure maintainability or technical debt. In terms of vulnerability depth, neither tool performs the kind of deep inter-procedural data flow analysis that enterprise SAST tools do, but SonarQube does have some taint analysis in its security engine for certain language/framework combos. Semgrep’s Community Edition, as noted, intentionally limits itself to single-file patterns unless you use their advanced (paid) engine.

Beyond source code: Both tools are primarily aimed at application source code. They do not natively scan infrastructure-as-code (IaC) templates, container images, or cloud configs for misconfigurations – those would require custom rules (in Semgrep’s case) or separate tools. For example, you won’t get an alert about an open S3 bucket policy or an outdated Docker base image from vanilla SonarQube or Semgrep. And as mentioned, dependency scanning (SCA) is not included in either by default. (Semgrep’s commercial platform has added a software composition analysis feature for a few ecosystems, but the open-source Semgrep does not check your package.json or pom.xml for vulnerable libraries.)

Developer Experience (UI, DX, Onboarding, Reports, Tuning)

User Interface & Workflow: SonarQube provides a polished web UI by default. Developers and team leads can log into the SonarQube dashboard to see a project’s health: a list of issues (categorized by severity and type), trending metrics, and a quality gate status. The UI makes it easy to drill down into specific vulnerabilities or code smells and see detailed descriptions and fix recommendations. SonarQube’s UI also allows developers to mark findings as “Resolved” or “False Positive,” and administrators can enforce governance (like requiring a clean build before release). In contrast, Semgrep’s open-source tool does not come with a UI or persistent server – it runs as a command-line tool that prints results or produces JSON output.

For individual devs or small teams, this is fine (you can see findings in your terminal or code editor). However, larger teams might miss having a central dashboard; indeed, the lack of built-in GUI/dashboards in Semgrep OSS can slow adoption in organizations that need visibility and reporting. To bridge this, Semgrep offers a free (for small teams) SaaS platform where scan results are collected in a web UI – similar to SonarQube’s interface – including charts, trends, and the ability to triage findings. Using the Semgrep SaaS (or hosting its server) gives you that single pane of glass, but it requires uploading results or code to their system.

In summary, SonarQube wins on out-of-the-box UX for management and reporting, whereas Semgrep’s core experience is more “by developers, for developers,” integrated into tools developers already use (editors, GitHub, etc.) rather than a separate portal (unless you opt into one).

Developer workflow integration: Both tools aim to be developer-friendly, but in different ways. SonarQube integrates with IDEs via SonarLint – a plugin that surfaces Sonar issues in real-time as you code. It’s like having a personal code reviewer in your editor, catching mistakes before they even make it to a commit. SonarLint can greatly reduce friction for devs who might otherwise only see issues after pushing code.

‍Semgrep offers editor integration too (extensions for VS Code and IntelliJ family), which similarly highlight security issues on the fly. Aside from IDEs, the pull request experience is critical: SonarQube will decorate PRs with issues and summaries (when using developer edition or SonarCloud), and Semgrep (with its CI setups or GitHub app) will also leave comments directly on code diffs for any rule violations.

This inline feedback loop is hugely beneficial for developers – it means security and quality checks happen in context, during code review, not as an afterthought days later. Neither tool requires developers to leave their normal workflow to view results if set up properly.

Customization and tuning: Here is where Semgrep shines for developers: creating custom rules is straightforward. Semgrep rules are written in YAML and the pattern to search for often looks very much like the code you want to detect (with wildcards for variables, etc.). If your team has a specific coding pattern to enforce or a company-specific security flaw to catch, you can write a Semgrep rule for it in minutes. Many devs find this empowering. SonarQube, on the other hand, is not easily extensible by the average developer. Writing custom SonarQube rules typically requires Java programming and knowledge of abstract syntax trees, and it’s officially supported for only a handful of languages.

This means most teams rely on SonarSource’s provided rules and can only toggle them on/off, rather than create new ones from scratch. For tuning, both tools allow enabling or disabling specific checks. SonarQube lets you adjust rule severities and quality gate thresholds in its UI, and you can suppress false positives by marking them in the UI (or adding special comments in code to ignore an issue). Semgrep allows rule whitelisting/blacklisting via its config files, and you can add inline #nosem comments to ignore a specific instance of a finding.

One unique advantage on Semgrep’s side: it supports user-defined autofix for certain patterns – you can actually program a rule to not only detect an issue but also suggest a fix (e.g., automatically replace a dangerous function call with a safer alternative). SonarQube does not auto-fix code; it only provides guidance for a human to fix it.

Onboarding and maintenance: Initial setup for SonarQube can be heavier – if self-hosting, you need to deploy the SonarQube server (and possibly a database). Cloud offerings (SonarCloud) simplify this but come with costs. Semgrep is extremely easy to start – just install the CLI (a single binary or pip install semgrep) and run it locally or in CI. There’s no server component unless you choose to use the Semgrep Cloud platform.

Over time, maintaining SonarQube involves upgrading the server for new releases and managing user access, etc., whereas maintaining Semgrep mainly involves updating to the latest rule sets (which is as simple as pulling the latest Docker image or binary since the rules are versioned alongside). Both tools continuously update their security rules (SonarQube via new releases, Semgrep via its registry of rules). In terms of community support, SonarQube has been around longer so there are plenty of forum Q&As, but Semgrep’s community is very active as well (with a Slack channel and lots of open-source contributors). You won’t struggle to find help with either.

Pricing and Maintenance

SonarQube follows a traditional model: the core platform is open-source (free) for Community Edition, but many valuable features (like additional security rules, deeper analysis, support for certain languages, and enterprise governance features) require paid editions. SonarQube’s commercial pricing is typically based on the lines of code (LOC) analyzed. This can mean costs grow with your codebase – not always predictable if you have multiple projects or rapidly expanding code. Sonar does offer an unlimited LOC option at higher fixed prices, usually targeted at large enterprises. If you opt for SonarCloud (SaaS), pricing is monthly based on LOC as well. For a small codebase, SonarQube can be very affordable (or even free), but a large organization might pay quite a bit. Maintenance-wise, if self-hosted, you’ll need someone to manage updates and keep the SonarQube server running (plus hardware costs). Many smaller teams start with the free version on a spare server or even a developer’s machine.

Semgrep is open-source and free to use for its CLI and rules, regardless of codebase size. They make money by offering Semgrep Team/Enterprise (a hosted or on-prem platform with extra features like team collaboration, centralized results, and advanced analysis). Semgrep’s SaaS has a generous free tier (at the time of writing, free for up to 10 developers on private repos), then moves to a paid model typically charging per user or per seat. This can be more predictable for some teams (scales with number of devs, not LOC). For example, a team of 50 developers would pay for 50 seats, regardless of code size – which might be simpler than SonarQube’s LOC model if your projects are large. However, if you’re an open-source project or a tiny startup, you might get by with Semgrep entirely free. Maintenance for Semgrep CLI is minimal (just update the tool periodically).

If you use the hosted Semgrep App, there’s essentially no maintenance on your side (they handle updates/back-end). If you deploy Semgrep’s platform on-prem, then you have some upkeep, but that’s more for larger enterprises. In summary, SonarQube can incur significant costs as you scale (especially with multiple projects and millions of LOC) and requires infrastructure to run, whereas Semgrep offers a low-cost or free entry point and shifts costs to a per-user model for advanced features, with very low infrastructure overhead for the core tool. Each organization will need to weigh which pricing model suits them – some prefer the one-time license model of SonarQube, others prefer subscription per team member. It’s worth noting that some newer platforms (like Aikido) are trying simpler flat-rate pricing to avoid these calculations.

Aikido offers a simpler, more transparent pricing model – flat and predictable – and is significantly more affordable at scale than either Snyk or Wiz.

Other Differentiators

Beyond the basics, there are a few other factors that set SonarQube and Semgrep apart:

• Rule Library & Community: Semgrep benefits from a large open-community rule library. There are thousands of rules written by security researchers and developers, covering everything from common CVEs to framework-specific best practices. You can tap into this “long tail” of checks easily, and the community rapidly adds rules for newly discovered vulnerabilities. SonarQube’s rules are mostly curated by SonarSource (the vendor) – they cover a broad range of issues but in a more limited scope. SonarQube focuses on generic code quality and the most prevalent security risks (CWE, OWASP Top 10), and doesn’t rely on community contributions for rules in the same way. This means Semgrep might have a rule for that niche scenario in your codebase (especially if you write it yourself or find it in the registry), whereas SonarQube will stick to more general patterns.
• AI and Smart Features: Neither SonarQube nor Semgrep is heavily “AI-driven” in their core scanning. They use static pattern matching and dataflow techniques rather than machine learning to detect issues. SonarQube does employ some advanced analysis heuristics (and according to some sources, even machine learning for bug detection) in the background, but it’s not a marquee feature. Semgrep similarly focuses on rule-based analysis, though the company has introduced an experimental Semgrep Assistant that can help suggest rules or triage findings (and they integrate with GitHub Copilot for autofixing some issues on their platform). In contrast, Aikido and a few others tout AI-driven triaging to cut down false positives, but SonarQube/Semgrep users mostly won’t see “AI” in daily use. One notable differentiator: Semgrep can automatically fix code for certain findings (if a rule has an autofix snippet) – essentially applying a quick patch. This is relatively new and not widely used yet, but it’s there. SonarQube does not auto-fix code issues, it only reports them.
• Compliance and reporting: If you have compliance requirements (ISO 27001, PCI DSS, etc.), SonarQube’s Enterprise Edition offers portfolio reports and governance features that help ensure teams follow certain standards. You can map SonarQube rules to compliance requirements and generate reports for auditors. Semgrep doesn’t natively provide compliance reporting, though you could use specific rules mapped to standards (e.g., rules targeting OWASP Top 10 or CERT secure coding guidelines). SonarQube also has Security Hotspots review workflow which is a unique concept to involve developers in deciding if something is a real issue or not. This can be seen as a pro or con: it forces a human-in-the-loop for certain findings. Semgrep, conversely, either flags or doesn’t flag – there’s no intermediate “hotspot” state in its findings.
• Release cadence and updates: Semgrep, being newer and open-source, has very rapid releases (often multiple times a month). Rules get updated frequently (including out-of-band via the registry). SonarQube releases are less frequent (couple times a year for major versions), and rules updates come with those releases. Depending on how quickly you want new checks (e.g., for a newly disclosed vulnerability), Semgrep might deliver faster through the community.
• Use cases: SonarQube is often favored by teams that want a combined code quality and security dashboard – for example, a team that cares about code coverage %, code style, duplications and wants to catch vulns will appreciate the one-stop nature of SonarQube. It’s also heavily used to measure technical debt and improve general code health, not just security. Semgrep is favored by security-focused teams and developers who want to hack on their own rules – it’s like a Swiss army knife for static analysis that you can tailor. If you have a strong security engineering group, Semgrep is almost like a framework they can build on (writing custom checks unique to your app). If you want a plug-and-play solution with standard metrics and don’t intend to write custom rules yourself, SonarQube’s approach might appeal more.

Pros and Cons of Each Tool

SonarQube Pros:

• All-in-one code quality + security: Combines static security analysis with code quality checks (maintainability, test coverage, duplication) in one platform. Great for enforcing overall code standards, not just security.
• Developer-friendly UI and workflow: Has a rich web UI and SonarLint IDE plugins for instant feedback. Easy for devs to see issues and fix them, with guidance provided. Quality Gates can block bad code from merging, instilling good hygiene.
• Broad language support: Supports ~20 languages out-of-box (Java, C#, C/C++, Python, JavaScript, etc.) covering most enterprise stacks. One tool can scan back-end, front-end, mobile code all together.
• Easy CI/CD integration: Well-documented integration with Jenkins, GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Azure DevOps, etc. plus PR decoration to comment on issues in code review.
• Active ecosystem and reliability: Established tool with extensive documentation and community forums. It’s a mature platform that many companies have trusted for years, so it’s relatively stable and predictable.

SonarQube Cons:

• Limited security depth: SonarQube’s security rules are not as deep or extensive as dedicated AppSec tools. It might miss certain critical vulnerabilities (e.g., SSRF or logic flaws) because it focuses on known patterns. It’s a “lightweight” SAST – good coverage of common issues, but not infallible.
• False positives & hotspot review: While SonarQube tries to reduce noise, it still flags some issues that aren’t real problems, especially in security. It separates many of these as “hotspots” requiring manual review, which is extra work for devs. In a sense, it can defer the false positive problem to the developer.
• No coverage beyond code: SonarQube doesn’t handle dependency vulns (SCA) or runtime testing. You’ll need other tools for open-source vulns, container scans, etc.. It’s not a one-stop AppSec solution, despite marketing – primarily SAST + quality.
• Setup and maintenance effort: Self-hosting SonarQube means maintaining a server (or cluster for large scale). This can be non-trivial – upgrades, backups, and user management require effort. If using SonarCloud SaaS you avoid infrastructure, but then you’re paying continuously.
• Cost scales with code size: The free edition is great to start, but many features require paid licenses. Licensing based on lines of code can get expensive as your codebase grows, potentially impacting larger organizations’ budgets.

Semgrep Pros:

• Highly customizable and flexible: You can write your own rules in minutes to catch issues specific to your codebase. This flexibility is unparalleled – Semgrep is essentially a toolkit that developers can extend easily.
• Extensive rule library: Out-of-the-box, you have access to thousands of community rules covering lots of languages and frameworks. It’s like having a crowd-sourced brain constantly adding new security checks for the latest vulnerabilities.
• Fast performance: Scans are blazingly fast (tens of thousands of LOC per second). This makes it practical to run on every commit or as a git pre-push hook without significant slowdowns. Quick feedback keeps developers happy.
• Easy adoption & integration: Minimal setup – run a single CLI in CI. Official integrations with GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, Jenkins, etc. are available, and results can show up directly in PR comments for developers. No heavy infrastructure needed for the open-source tool.
• Developer-centric approach: Designed with devs in mind – the rule syntax looks like code, and it fits naturally into a git workflow. Developers often find Semgrep fun to use (it feels empowering to codify a pattern and immediately catch issues). It also supports IDE scanning, so it can act like a security linter during development.
• Open-source with no barrier to entry: The core tool is free and open, so teams on a budget can start improving security immediately. Even the paid Semgrep SaaS has a free tier, which is nice for small teams.

Semgrep Cons:

• High noise without tuning: By default, running a broad set of Semgrep rules can yield a lot of findings, not all of which are important. Many users report the need to spend time tuning out false positives or low-priority alerts. Without refinement, the signal-to-noise ratio can frustrate developers (nobody wants hundreds of “possible issue” flags).
• Shallow analysis (OSS version): Semgrep’s free engine lacks cross-file and data-flow analysis, so it may miss vulnerabilities that involve multiple steps or files (e.g., an XSS that originates in one file and manifests in another). Deep logic or authentication flaws (like certain broken access control cases) are often beyond its pattern-based approach. In one example, Semgrep couldn’t detect an authorization bypass without a very custom rule, because it doesn’t “understand” the broader app logic.
• Security-only focus (no quality metrics): Semgrep doesn’t help with code quality, maintainability, or test coverage. Teams looking for a combined picture will need a separate solution for those aspects. It’s not a replacement for a full-featured code quality platform (whereas SonarQube covers both worlds).
• Learning curve for custom rules: While simpler than Sonar’s, writing good Semgrep rules still requires some knowledge. Complex patterns can be tricky to express, and maintaining a set of custom rules over time means you need someone updating them as the code evolves. This can be an ongoing maintenance effort (though often worth it).
• Lack of built-in UI/reporting (without platform): The open-source Semgrep doesn’t aggregate results over time or provide fancy dashboards. For a security lead wanting trend reports or a bird’s-eye view, that’s a limitation unless you use the commercial platform. This can make it harder to track progress or prove compliance using just Semgrep OSS.
• Advanced features behind paywall: Some capabilities like team collaboration, central management of rules/policies, and the more advanced “pro” engine (with inter-procedural analysis) require a paid plan. Organizations with tight budgets might find the free vs paid split challenging if they need those features, although the cost is generally reasonable compared to big enterprise SAST tools.

Aikido Security: The Better Alternative

Aikido Security positions itself as a solution that addresses the above shortcomings of both SonarQube and Semgrep. It’s an all-in-one platform offering full-stack coverage – combining SAST, DAST, SCA, secret scanning, cloud config checks, etc., in one tool. The key promise is fewer false positives through smart triaging: Aikido uses vetted rules and AI-based analysis to filter out up to 95% of noise, so developers only see real issues. The setup is simple and developer-first: it’s cloud-based with slick IDE and CI integrations (and even one-click AI autofixes for certain vulnerabilities). Importantly for leadership, Aikido offers predictable pricing – a flat-rate model without per-seat or per-scan charges. In short, Aikido aims to give you SonarQube’s breadth and Semgrep’s depth, minus the headache. It delivers comprehensive app security coverage with minimal tuning and maintenance, letting your team focus on coding confidently and securely.

Start a free Trial or request a demo to explore the full solution.