Snyk vs GitHub Code Security
This is the cheapest migration on the shortlist and the one most likely to disappoint, for the same reason. Half of it is genuinely free: Dependabot alerts and version updates cost nothing on every GitHub plan, private repositories included, and they open the upgrade pull request rather than just reporting. The other half is not, and it is metered the same way you are leaving. Since the March 2025 unbundling of Advanced Security, Code Security is $30 and Secret Protection $19 per month per active committer over a 90-day window, which is Snyk's contributing-developer mechanic with a different label.
Pick GitHub if your code is already there and dependency scanning was most of what you wanted from Snyk, because Dependabot is free and needs no integration at all. Stay on Snyk if you need container image and infrastructure-as-code scanning, since GitHub's add-ons do not cover them and $49 per active committer buys you less surface than Snyk Team's $25 starting figure.
Side by side
Snyk vs GitHub at a glance
| Snyk | GitHub | |
|---|---|---|
| What the licence counts | Contributing developers, 90-day commit window | Active committers, 90-day push window |
| Dependency alerts | Metered on Free, 200 tests a month | ✓ free on every plan, private repos too |
| Automatic version-bump PRs | ✓ paid | ✓ free, Dependabot version updates |
| SAST on your own code | ✓ Snyk Code, in the bundle | CodeQL, $30 per active committer per month |
| Secret scanning, private repos | ✓ paid tiers | $19 per active committer per month |
| Secret scanning, public repos | Not applicable | ✓ free |
| Container image scanning | ✓ | ✗ not offered |
| IaC misconfiguration | ✓ | ✗ not offered |
| Cost of the SAST plus secrets pair | Included from Team at $25 | $49 per active committer per month |
| Works outside GitHub | ✓ GitLab, Bitbucket, Azure DevOps | ✗ GitHub only |
| Integration effort | Connect each repository | ✓ none, it is already there |
| Where findings appear | Snyk dashboard, plus SARIF | ✓ the pull request and Security tab |
| Published price above entry | Ignite $1,260 per developer per year | ✓ flat per-committer add-on prices |
| Best for | Four scan types, any git host | Free dependency coverage where your code already lives |
Sources: Snyk plans · GitHub changelog on the two add-ons · GitHub pricing · Dependabot docs. Compiled August 2026.
Where GitHub wins
The dependency half costs nothing, and it fixes things
Dependabot alerts and version updates are free on every plan, private repositories included. Crucially it does the part open-source scanners skip: it opens the pull request that upgrades the vulnerable package. If you audit your Snyk usage and find that the findings people actually merge are dependency bumps, this is the whole subscription replaced by a checkbox.
Zero integration surface
There is no repository to connect, no token to rotate and no separate dashboard for developers to ignore. Findings arrive in the pull request they belong to and in the Security tab, which is the single largest predictor of whether a security tool changes behaviour. A cheaper scanner nobody reads is more expensive than an expensive one people act on.
The prices above the entry tier are published
Both add-ons have a flat public per-committer number, and GitHub plan pricing is $4 per user on Team and $21 on Enterprise. There is no tier where the answer becomes "talk to sales", which is a real contrast with Snyk's Enterprise step and with Semgrep's.
CodeQL is a serious engine, and it is opt-in
You can enable Code Security on the repositories that hold the risk and leave the rest on free Dependabot, which is a more precise lever than a subscription that counts everyone who commits anywhere you connected. Treat any vendor's detection comparisons between CodeQL and Snyk Code as vendor claims; the difference that survives scrutiny is where the findings land, not whose percentage is higher.
Where Snyk still wins
The meter is the same idea, so switching does not escape it. GitHub bills active committers over a 90-day push window; Snyk bills contributing developers over a 90-day commit window. If your complaint is that the bill grows with how much code you cover rather than with how many people use the tool, moving to GitHub's paid add-ons changes the vendor, not the shape. The genuinely different shapes are unmetered tools such as Trivy and flat per-workspace pricing.
Two of Snyk's four scanners have no GitHub equivalent. There is no container image scanning and no infrastructure-as-code misconfiguration checking in these add-ons. Teams shipping containers to Kubernetes lose real coverage, and they end up adding Trivy anyway, at which point the comparison is a three-tool stack against one subscription.
And it only works on GitHub. Snyk covers GitLab, Bitbucket and Azure DevOps. Any repository outside GitHub is simply unscanned, which is a hard blocker for organisations mid-migration or running a second host for a subsidiary.
Migrating Snyk to GitHub
The path most teams take:
1. Turn on the free half today. Enable Dependabot alerts and version updates organisation-wide. It costs nothing, it duplicates part of Snyk immediately, and the pull-request volume tells you how much of your Snyk value was dependency upgrades.
2. Count your active committers before pricing CodeQL. $30 plus $19 per committer per month is $49, so the arithmetic only favours GitHub at small committer counts or when you need one add-on rather than both. Do this sum with a real number from your organisation, not an estimate.
3. Cover containers and IaC separately. Trivy in the same CI job closes both gaps for free. Plan this as part of the migration rather than discovering it after cancelling.
4. Enable Code Security selectively. Start with the repositories that handle untrusted input or payments. Blanket enablement is how the committer count, and the invoice, quietly doubles.
5. What does not move. Snyk's project history and dismissal decisions stay behind, and CodeQL will surface its own first-run backlog with no memory of what your team already triaged. Budget a triage sprint, and export the Snyk ignore list before the account closes.
Common questions
FAQ: Snyk vs GitHub Code Security
Is Dependabot enough to replace Snyk?
If what you used Snyk for was dependency alerts and upgrade pull requests, then largely yes, and it costs nothing on every GitHub plan including private repositories. Dependabot both alerts on vulnerable dependencies and opens the pull request that bumps them, which is the part most open-source scanners leave to you. What it does not do is scan container images, check infrastructure-as-code configuration, or analyse your own application code, so it covers one of Snyk's four scanners rather than all of them.
How does GitHub bill Code Security and Secret Protection?
Since the March 2025 unbundling of GitHub Advanced Security, the two are separate add-ons: Secret Protection at $19 per month per active committer and Code Security at $30 per month per active committer. Active committers are unique people who have pushed to a repository with the feature enabled over a 90-day window, which is the same mechanic Snyk uses for contributing developers. Secret scanning stays free for public repositories, and Dependabot alerts and version updates are free everywhere.
Is GitHub cheaper than Snyk for security scanning?
It depends on how much of the surface you need. Dependency scanning on GitHub is free where Snyk meters it, so a team that only wanted dependency coverage saves the whole subscription. But adding CodeQL and secret scanning is $49 per active committer per month, which is above Snyk Team's $25 starting figure for a bundle that also includes container and IaC scanning. The honest summary is that GitHub is cheaper at the bottom, not obviously cheaper in the middle, and both bills grow with the number of people who commit.