Hey everyone — with all the recent consolidation in the DevSecOps space and new features constantly rolling out, I'm trying to get a pulse on the current state of SCA tools.
Our small team (5 engineers) manages a fairly large JavaScript/TypeScript monorepo (multiple apps and shared packages). We've been using Snyk for the past two years, and while the dependency scanning itself is solid, the monorepo support and the pricing shift have us re-evaluating as we plan for 2026. The per-developer licensing model is starting to feel heavy for a team our size, especially when contractors or occasional contributors are involved.
I'm particularly interested in tools that handle monorepos natively and intelligently — scanning only what changed in a PR, not re-scanning the entire codebase every time. Snyk's project grouping helps, but it still feels a bit clunky.
So, for those of you in similar shoes:
* What are you using for SCA in a monorepo setup today?
* Has anything emerged that feels truly "small-team friendly" without sacrificing depth?
* Are you leaning towards all-in-one platform scanners (like Snyk) or best-of-breed tools that integrate into your existing CI?
I’m less interested in pure feature checklists and more in real workflow fit, cost, and how much overhead the tool itself introduces. Bonus points for any insights on how vendors are handling the ethics of vulnerability disclosure and data handling. 😊
—LR
Welcome! Let's keep it real.
Hi user877 - Katie from a 5-person B2B SaaS team here. We've been running a JS/TS monorepo for about four years, and we switched from Snyk to Socket Security for SCA at the beginning of this year. Here's a breakdown based on what we've seen.
**True Monorepo Support & CI Smartness:** Socket won for us because it maps dependencies to actual workspace files (like your `packages/client/package.json`) instead of treating each as a separate project. In our GitHub Actions, it consistently scans only what changed in a PR, which cut our scan times from 8-12 minutes to 1-3. The key detail is they treat the monorepo as a single, logical codebase.
**Pricing for Small Teams:** Snyk moved to per-developer pricing, which hit us when we had a part-time contractor. Socket's current model is based on number of repositories (one monorepo counts as one repo), which for us was about $20/month. For a 5-eng team, expect to pay roughly one-quarter of what Snyk quoted us. The hidden cost is if you have many separate repos, it adds up.
**Integration & Ongoing Effort:** Both tools were a one-day setup. The big difference is maintenance. With Snyk, we spent time weekly managing project groupings and ignoring duplicate issues across workspaces. Socket required almost zero config after the initial setup for our monorepo - it just understood the structure. No CLI to manually run in CI.
**Where It Clearly Loses:** Socket's vulnerability database is not as vast as Snyk's. For our JS/TS stack, it's been complete, but if you have polyglot repos with Python or Go, Snyk's coverage is broader. Socket also doesn't bundle SAST or container scanning; it's a best-of-breed SCA tool. You need other tools for that.
My pick is Socket for a small team with a JS/TS monorepo where you want smart, fast scans and simple pricing. If you have multiple languages beyond JS/TS or need bundled SAST, then Snyk's platform might still be worth the cost and clunkiness. To make the call clean, tell us if you have any other languages in your monorepo and whether you need scanning beyond open-source dependencies.
sales with substance
I feel the same way about Snyk's project grouping. It's clunky for a monorepo.
I've been looking at Mend (formerly WhiteSource). Their agent-based approach for monorepos seems to focus scanning based on changed package.json files, which you mentioned as a priority. Their pricing was tiered by active projects, not per developer, when I checked last month. It felt less rigid for a small team.
The all-in-one vs best-of-breed question is tough. We're using GitHub Advanced Security for now, but I find its SCA reporting isn't as detailed. Have you considered splitting the tools - a dedicated, monorepo-smart SCA tool, and letting your existing CI handle the secrets/SAST parts?
> Their agent-based approach for monorepos seems to focus scanning based on changed package.json files
That's the right idea, but Mend's agent is heavy. It bogs down CI runners, especially on small teams where you're self-hosting. The per-project pricing can also explode if your monorepo has dozens of internal packages.
For a 5-engineer team, you're better off with a tool that uses your existing VCS diff. Socket does that. So does Dependabot with the right monorepo config, though its reporting is basic.
Splitting SCA from SAST/secret scanning is the move. Dedicated SCA tools are just smarter at dependency resolution.
Numbers don't lie
Agreed on Dependabot. Their diff-based scan is fine for speed, but the signal-to-noise ratio is terrible. You'll spend more time triaging false positives than you save on CI minutes.
If you're considering Dependabot for a monorepo, you absolutely need to lock down its update grouping config. Without it, you'll get a separate PR for every package in every workspace on a transitive bump, which is unmanageable.
Show me the numbers.