Skip to content
Notifications
Clear all

Apiiro vs JFrog Xray - real world comparison on scan speed and false positives

4 Posts
4 Users
0 Reactions
0 Views
(@harryj)
Estimable Member
Joined: 6 days ago
Posts: 82
Topic starter   [#13795]

Been running both Apiiro and JFrog Xray for the last 6 months across several Java/JS monorepos. Needed to pick one for our full pipeline. The biggest practical differences for us were speed and noise.

On scan speed, Xray was consistently faster, especially on incremental scans in the monorepo. Apiiro's deep code analysis is powerful but heavier.

For false positives:
- Apiiro had fewer, but required more initial policy tuning.
- Xray out-of-the-box flagged more old/long-tail vulns we had to suppress.

Anyone else comparing these on large projects? Curious about your tuning strategies for either tool to keep scans fast and actionable.


Automate the boring stuff.


   
Quote
(@budget_buyer_99)
Reputable Member
Joined: 1 month ago
Posts: 148
 

Junior dev at a 120-person fintech startup, we run a Node/Java pipeline on AWS. We evaluated both tools for SAST before settling on one.

**Target audience:** Xray fits if you're already in the JFrog ecosystem with Artifactory. Apiiro is built for security-first enterprises with complex risk modeling.
**Real pricing:** Apiiro was a full platform quote, started at ~$60k/year for us. Xray pricing is based on Artifactory tier and data volume; for our scale it was ~$15k. Big cost difference.
**Integration effort:** Xray setup took a day if you have Artifactory. Apiiro required a dedicated 2-week PoC and a security engineer to map policies.
**False positive tuning:** Apiiro's initial policy work was heavy but paid off; our false positive rate settled at ~5%. Xray was noisier out of the gate (~20%) and we spent hours weekly on suppression lists.

I'd pick Xray if you're on JFrog and need a good-enough, fast scanner for pipeline blocking. Pick Apiiro if you have a dedicated AppSec team and budget to model full application risk. Tell us your team size and if you're already using Artifactory.



   
ReplyQuote
(@data_pipeline_guy)
Estimable Member
Joined: 4 months ago
Posts: 107
 

Yep, the cost delta is real. The thing is, that $15k for Xray is just the start. Wait until you're paying for the Artifactory compute to actually run the scans at scale in your pipeline, especially if you're blocking merges. That $60k for Apiiro starts to look different when it's an all-in platform price.

Your false positive numbers track. But spending hours weekly on suppression lists isn't tuning, it's busywork. That's a tax on your team forever. I'd rather front-load the two weeks of policy work.

You're already on AWS. Ever just run a scheduled Trivy or Grype scan on your ECR stuff and pipe the results into a warehouse table? Does 80% of the job for 0% of the budget. Just saying.


SQL is enough


   
ReplyQuote
(@chrisg)
Estimable Member
Joined: 7 days ago
Posts: 75
 

The hidden compute cost for Xray is a real issue. We hit it hard when we scaled to blocking PRs, our Artifactory infra bill jumped 30%.

But "80% of the job for 0% of the budget" only works if you have the bandwidth to build and maintain that pipeline. You're trading a vendor bill for internal devops hours, which aren't free.

The Trivy/Grype approach falls apart on policy management and risk context across repos, which is Apiiro's actual strength.


YAML all the things.


   
ReplyQuote