Softwr

APIs · head to head

Convoy vs Grype

Convoy logo

Convoy

APIs

Open source webhooks gateway you self-host, handling both sending and receiving

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Grype logo

Grype

Cybersecurity

Vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Convoy the default deployment is self-hosted, so you operate Convoy plus Postgres and Redis and carry the on-call burden for the system that delivers your customers' events.; Grype depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • They diverge on capability: Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Convoy and Grype actually diverge.

Attributes where Convoy and Grype differ
AttributeConvoyGrype
Pricing modelPer month, flat rate regardless of volumeOpen source, no licence fee
PlatformsLinux, Docker, Kubernetes, CloudLinux, macOS, Windows, Docker
CategoryAPIsCybersecurity

Identical on both: starting price (Free), free tier (Yes), user rating (Not yet rated).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Convoy

  • Inbound and outbound
  • Broker-driven ingestion
  • Payload transformation
  • Portal links
  • Circuit breaking
  • Retry policies
  • OpenTelemetry export
  • Role-based access control

Only in Grype

  • Image and filesystem scanning
  • SBOM-driven
  • Wide ecosystem coverage
  • Pipeline friendly

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Convoy

  • A fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party SaaS for compliance reasonsnot Grype
  • A high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licencenot Grype
  • A team that also receives webhooks from many providers and wants ingestion, verification and deduplication in the same gatewaynot Grype
  • An engineering group that wants webhook delivery driven directly from an existing Kafka or SQS topicnot Grype

Grype

  • Re-scanning stored SBOMs as new CVEs are published, without rebuilding imagesnot Convoy
  • Failing CI when a build introduces a known vulnerabilitynot Convoy
  • Auditing what is actually installed inside a third-party imagenot Convoy

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Convoy

  • The default deployment is self-hosted, so you operate Convoy plus Postgres and Redis and carry the on-call burden for the system that delivers your customers' events.
  • Frain Technologies is a small startup, and putting customer-facing delivery infrastructure on it means accepting real vendor continuity risk on a component that is hard to swap out quickly.
  • The premium tier at a flat 999 US dollars a month is poor value below substantial volume, while the community edition omits the portal, transformations and RBAC that most production deployments end up wanting.
  • The hosted cloud trial is capped at one project and 100 events a day, which is too small to properly evaluate the service before committing.
  • Documentation and the third-party ecosystem are thinner than the established webhook services, so unusual configurations often mean reading the Go source.

Grype

  • Depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • No triage, exception tracking or reporting UI — that is Anchore’s commercial product
  • Overlaps heavily with Trivy, and most teams pick one rather than running both

Pricing, plan by plan

Convoy

Free
  • CommunityFree
    • Self-hosted open source gateway
    • Inbound and outbound webhooks
    • Automatic retries and message broker support
  • Premium$999/month
    • Flat rate irrespective of message volume
    • Portal links and payload transformation
    • RBAC, circuit breaking and white labelling
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • SAML SSO
    • Dedicated support with SLA
    • On-premises deployment assistance
  • Cloud$undefined/month
    • Hosted by Convoy
    • 14 day trial limited to one project and 100 events a day
    • Usage-based tiers above the trial

Grype

Free
  • GrypeFree
    • Full functionality
    • No usage limits
    • Community support

Which should you pick?

Choose Convoy if

  • You need inbound and outbound.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud.
  • You also want broker-driven ingestion.
Convoy review

Choose Grype if

  • You need image and filesystem scanning.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want sbom-driven.
Grype review

Questions people ask

Is Convoy or Grype better?
Neither clearly leads. Convoy starts at Free and Grype at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Convoy or Grype?
Convoy starts at Free and Grype at Free.
Does Convoy or Grype run on more platforms?
Convoy runs on Linux, Docker, Kubernetes, Cloud. Grype runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Convoy for free?
Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
What is Convoy best used for?
Convoy is most often used for a fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party saas for compliance reasons, a high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licence, a team that also receives webhooks from many providers and wants ingestion, verification and deduplication in the same gateway, an engineering group that wants webhook delivery driven directly from an existing kafka or sqs topic. Of those, a fintech that cannot route customer webhook traffic through a third-party saas for compliance reasons and a high-volume platform for which per-message webhook pricing costs more than the flat premium licence are not what Grype is typically brought in for.
What can Convoy do that Grype cannot?
Convoy covers Inbound and outbound, Broker-driven ingestion, Payload transformation, Portal links. Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, SBOM-driven, Wide ecosystem coverage, Pipeline friendly.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Convoy: Is Convoy really open source?

Yes, the community edition is open source and self-hostable, covering both inbound and outbound webhooks with retries.

Grype: Is Grype free?

Yes, open source from Anchore. Anchore Enterprise is the paid platform around it.

Convoy: What does premium cost?

A flat 999 US dollars a month, self-hosted, regardless of message volume.

Grype: What is the difference between Grype and Syft?

Syft generates the software bill of materials; Grype matches that inventory against vulnerability data. They are designed to be used together.

Convoy: Does it receive webhooks as well as send them?

Yes, inbound ingestion with verification and deduplication is a first-class feature, unlike most webhook services.

Grype: Grype or Trivy?

They cover similar ground. Trivy is broader out of the box, including misconfiguration and secret scanning; Grype pairs more cleanly with an SBOM-first workflow.

Convoy: Do I have to self-host?

No, there is a hosted cloud, but the trial is capped at 100 events a day and self-hosting is the primary model.

Share

Related pages

More on Convoy

More on Grype

Keep looking

Other head to heads