Opinions
Top 10 SAST tools: Choose the best static code analysis tool
Content writer and editor
Updated
Dec 3, 2025
8 min
Static application security testing (SAST) analyzes source code, bytecode, and binary code to find potential security weaknesses before code is compiled or executed. Used to detect vulnerabilities early in the software development lifecycle (SDLC), SAST remains one of the most effective ways to “shift left” security.
The integration of artificial intelligence and machine learning is rapidly transforming static analysis. Modern SAST tools now feature automated fix capabilities that generate secure code suggestions and sometimes apply fixes immediately—all without developers leaving their IDE or breaking CI/CD flow. These innovations significantly ease the burden on development teams, allowing them to focus on building applications while maintaining strong security postures.
As an important note, though, while SAST tools offer powerful automated scanning and fixing capabilities, the reality is that they often generate reports with high rates of false positives. (The impacts of false positives waste time and effort and possibly large monetary losses.) This is precisely why human verification remains essential, and why the most effective approach combines automated tools with manual security testing by pentesters who understand application context.
At Fluid Attacks, we've learned that SAST is most effective when integrated into a comprehensive security strategy that includes multiple testing methodologies. Our approach combines SAST with software composition analysis (SCA), dynamic application security testing (DAST), penetration testing as a service (PTaaS), secure code review (SCR), and reverse engineering to provide deep visibility across your entire codebase.
What makes a SAST tool effective?
Before diving into our comparison, it's important to understand the key factors that separate exceptional SAST tools from problematic ones:
Accuracy is paramount. A tool must minimize false positives while maintaining low false negative rates. Security teams need actionable insights, not noise that buries real vulnerabilities under mountains of irrelevant alerts. In this top 10, accuracy is given in F0.5 scores, a measure from 0 to 100 involving true positives and false positives that focuses on the relevance of detected elements out of the total detections by scanners. The values in this analysis correspond to those accomplished by the automated solutions in their entirety, so they might involve testing techniques additional to SAST.
Standards mapping ensures helpful information for compliance, which translates into avoiding costly penalties. Enterprise organizations require visibility into how vulnerabilities map to security standards like OWASP Top 10, CWE Top 25, PCI DSS, and NIST. This mapping is crucial for regulatory compliance and, the more comprehensive the mapping evidenced in reports, the more exhaustive compliance can be.
Language support represents the testing scope. Modern development projects use diverse technology stacks, and the SAST tool you choose must comprehensively cover the programming languages and frameworks your team employs.
Automated fixes capabilities represent relevance in today's technological advancement. AI-powered automated remediation is transforming SAST from a detection-only tool into a solution that helps developers fix vulnerabilities quickly without leaving their development environment. We made sure that all tools in the top 10 are keeping up with the fast pace of AI achievements.
Top 10 SAST tools compared
1 - Fluid Attacks
Accuracy: 59.2
Mapped standards: Maps to 67 international standards including OWASP, CWE, PCI DSS, CERT®, SOC 2®, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST, GDPR, and HIPAA
Languages supported: Supports 12 languages, which are C#, Dart, Go, Java, JavaScript, Kotlin, PHP, Python, Ruby, Scala, Swift, and TypeScript
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes and customized remediation guidance
Fluid Attacks leads the top 10 with a SAST tool that is highly accurate by industry standards and maps results to a great array of international security standards. Fluid Attacks' language support is focused on highly used technologies, and its incrementing AI implementation covers the growing needs of developing teams.
2 - Snyk Code
Accuracy: 49.1
Mapped standards: Maps to 16 standards, including CWE, PCI DSS, SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST, GDPR, and HIPAA
Languages supported: Supports 20 languages, including C, C++, Dart, Elixir, Go, Java, JavaScript, Kotlin, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala, Swift, and TypeScript
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with Snyk
3 - SonarQube
Accuracy: 46.4
Mapped standards: Maps to 10 standards, including PCI DSS, OWASP, CERT-C, CWE, MISRA-C, and NIST
Languages supported: Supports 26 languages, including Apex, C, COBOL, Dart, Go, Java, JavaScript, TypeScript, PHP, Python, Ruby, Scala, Swift, VB.NET, and Objective-C
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with SonarQube
4 - GitHub Advanced Security
Accuracy: 21.3
Mapped standards: Maps to 9 standards, including CERT, SANS Top 25, OWASP, AUTOSAR, SOC 2, SLSA, ISO/IEC 27001, and SOC 1 type II
Languages supported: Supports 11 languages, which are C, C++, C#, Go, Java, Kotlin, JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Swift, and TypeScript
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with GitHub Advanced Security
5 - Checkmarx
Accuracy: 12.2
Mapped standards: Maps to 20 standards, including NIST, OWASP, PCI DSS, CCPA, CMMC, CWE, FedRAMP, FISMA, HIPAA, and SANS Top 25
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes and customized remediation guidance
Languages supported: Supports 36 languages, including Apex, C, C#, COBOL, Go, HTML, J2EE, J2SE, Java, JavaScript, Python, Ruby, Scala, Swift, and TypeScript
See a comprehensive comparison with Checkmarx
6 - Aikido
Accuracy: 14.0
Mapped standards: Maps to 8 standards, OWASP, ISO/IEC 27001, PCI DSS, SOC 2, and HIPAA
Supported languages: Supports 16 languages, including Dart, Elixir, Go, Java, JavaScript, Typescript, Ruby, PHP, Python, Rust, Scala, and Swift
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with Aikido
7 - JFrog
Accuracy: 14.1
Mapped standards: Maps to 5 standards, which are FedRAMP, HIPAA, NIST 800-53, NIST 800-171, and NIST SSDF
Supported languages: Supports 8 languages, including C#, JavaScript, TypeScript, Python, Java, and Go
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with JFrog
8 - Cycode
Accuracy: 9.8
Mapped standards: Maps to 12 standards, including OWASP, PCI DSS, SOC 2, FedRAMP, GDPR, HIPAA, ISO/IEC 27001, and NIST
Supported languages: Supports 13 languages, including C, Go, Java, JavaScript, Lua, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala, and TypeScript
Automated fixes: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes and customized remediation guidance
See a comprehensive comparison with Cycode
9 - Semgrep
Accuracy: 13.1
Mapped standards: Maps to 2 standards, which are CWE Top 25 and OWASP Top 10
Supported languages: Supports 18 languages, including Apex, C, Dart, Elixir, Go, Java, JavaScript, Kotlin, PHP, Python, Ruby, Rust, Scala, and Typescript
Autofix: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes and customized remediation guidance
See a comprehensive comparison with Semgrep
10 - Veracode
Accuracy: 1.6
Mapped standards: Maps to 32 standards, including OWASP, CWE, PCI DSS, CERT, SOC 2, ISO/IEC 27001, NIST, GDPR, and HIPAA
Supported languages: Supports 25 languages, including Apex, C, C#, C++, COBOL, ColdFusion, Dart, Go, Groovy, iOS, Java, Java EE, Java SE, JavaScript, Kotlin, Perl, PHP, PL/SQL, Python, RPG, Scala, Transact-SQL, TypeScript, VB.NET and VisualBasic 6.
Autofix: Provides AI-powered automatic fixes
See a comprehensive comparison with Veracode
Making your choice
Selecting a SAST tool requires careful consideration of your organization's specific needs. While it's true that this implies choosing a tool that supports your programming languages, it's plain to see that, in our view, the most important considerations are accuracy and standards mapping. A tool that overwhelms developers with false positives will discourage your team and obstruct progress, and that which cannot relate results to unfulfilled requirements across several standards, will not tell you your compliance gaps directly, which is especially helpful in regulated industries.
Going beyond SAST for comprehensive security
While SAST is crucial, it represents just one piece of the application security puzzle. At Fluid Attacks, we are aware of how limiting a SAST-only approach can be. Dynamic vulnerabilities that only manifest at runtime, business logic flaws requiring human understanding, and supply chain risks in third-party dependencies all demand complementary testing methods.
This is why we integrate SAST with DAST for runtime testing, SCA for dependency analysis, CSPM for cloud infrastructure security, and manual testing techniques to uncover a great deal of complex vulnerabilities that automated tools inevitably miss. Our pentesters provide expert support, helping development teams understand the most complex security issues so they can plan their remediation.
Ready to experience the difference that combined automation and human expertise can make? Start your 21-day free trial of Fluid Attacks Continuous Hacking and discover the goods of comprehensive security testing.
Get started with Fluid Attacks' application security solution right now
Other posts
