Softwr

Developer Tools · head to head

Cortex vs Grype

Cortex logo

Cortex

Developer Tools

Internal developer portal that scores service ownership and maturity rather than just cataloguing services

From
On request
Free plan
No
Full reviewWebsite
Grype logo

Grype

Cybersecurity

Vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems

From
Free
Free plan
Yes
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Grype has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Cortex pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.; Grype depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem
  • They diverge on capability: Cortex covers Service catalogue, 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 Cortex and Grype actually diverge.

Attributes where Cortex and Grype differ
AttributeCortexGrype
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWeb, APILinux, macOS, Windows, Docker
CategoryDeveloper ToolsCybersecurity

Identical on both: 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 Cortex

  • Service catalogue
  • Scorecards
  • Initiatives
  • Self-service templates
  • Query language
  • Eng intelligence
  • Integrations layer
  • On-call and ownership mapping

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.

Cortex

  • A platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a Kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of servicesnot Grype
  • An organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitionsnot Grype
  • Enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident reviewnot Grype
  • Replacing a self-hosted Backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgradednot Grype

Grype

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

Where each one falls short

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

Cortex

  • Pricing is quote only, so a platform team cannot build a business case or compare against the true cost of self-hosted Backstage without entering a sales cycle first.
  • The catalogue is only as accurate as the metadata you supply, so an organisation with inconsistent repository conventions spends its first quarter cleaning data before any scorecard means anything.
  • Scorecards create political friction: publishing a per-team grade turns an engineering standard into a performance metric, and teams will game the rules rather than fix the underlying issue.
  • It is closed source and hosted, so organisations with strict data residency or air-gap requirements have limited options compared with running Backstage themselves.
  • Value scales with organisation size, so a company with fifty engineers and thirty services will find the catalogue tells them nothing they did not already know while still paying an enterprise contract.

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

Cortex

On request
  • Cortex$undefined/year
    • Service catalogue and ownership mapping
    • Scorecards and initiatives
    • Self-service templates

Grype

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

Which should you pick?

Choose Cortex if

  • You need service catalogue.
  • You work on Web, API.
  • You also want scorecards.
Cortex 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 Cortex or Grype better?
Neither clearly leads. Cortex starts at On request and Grype at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Cortex or Grype?
Grype has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for Cortex and Free for Grype.
Does Cortex or Grype run on more platforms?
Cortex runs on Web, API. Grype runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Grype for free?
Yes. Grype has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Cortex starts at On request.
What is Cortex best used for?
Cortex is most often used for a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services, an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions, enforcing production readiness standards on new services at creation time rather than at incident review, replacing a self-hosted backstage that is consuming a full-time engineer or two just to stay upgraded. Of those, a platform team that needs to prove to leadership how far a kubernetes or framework migration has actually progressed across hundreds of services and an organisation where ownership of production services is genuinely unknown after reorganisations or acquisitions are not what Grype is typically brought in for.
What can Cortex do that Grype cannot?
Cortex covers Service catalogue, Scorecards, Initiatives, Self-service templates. Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, SBOM-driven, Wide ecosystem coverage, Pipeline friendly.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Cortex: How is Cortex different from Backstage?

Backstage is an open source framework you build and staff. Cortex is a hosted product with scorecards and initiatives out of the box and no platform team required to keep it running.

Grype: Is Grype free?

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

Cortex: Is pricing published?

No. Cortex requires a sales conversation and prepares a custom proposal.

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.

Cortex: Can it self-host?

It is offered as a hosted product; on-premise arrangements are handled through sales rather than published.

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.

Cortex: What is the main adoption risk?

Bad or missing service metadata. The catalogue and every scorecard on top of it inherit whatever quality your repositories already have.

Share

Related pages

More on Cortex

More on Grype

Keep looking

Other head to heads