Developer Tools · head to head
Deep Code vs Syft

Deep Code
Developer Tools
Desktop AI coding assistant that runs on DeepSeek models
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes

Syft
Cybersecurity
Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives
- From
- Free
- Free plan
- Yes
The short version
- Each has a real cost: Deep Code model choice is narrow. Bring your own key covers DeepSeek-V4-Pro and Flash plus the GLM and Mimo coding plans, and no frontier model from OpenAI, Anthropic or Google.; Syft lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
- They diverge on capability: Deep Code covers DeepSeek-backed agent, Syft covers Multi-format output.
- Prices and features above were last checked on 15 September 2026.
Where they differ
Only the attributes on which Deep Code and Syft actually diverge.
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 Deep Code
- DeepSeek-backed agent
- Session management
- File explorer
- Snippets panel
- Voice input
- Bring your own key
Only in Syft
- Multi-format output
- Broad ecosystem coverage
- Binary classifiers
- In-toto attestations
- Library and CLI
- Pairs with Grype
What people use each for
The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.
Deep Code
- AI-assisted coding on a budgetnot Syft
- Debugging and bug fixingnot Syft
- Refactoring existing codenot Syft
- Reusing prompt templates across projectsnot Syft
- Using an existing DeepSeek API key without proxy setupnot Syft
Syft
- Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Deep Code
- Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Deep Code
- Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Deep Code
- Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Deep Code
Where each one falls short
Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.
Deep Code
- Model choice is narrow. Bring your own key covers DeepSeek-V4-Pro and Flash plus the GLM and Mimo coding plans, and no frontier model from OpenAI, Anthropic or Google.
- The Pro tier caps included usage at 100 Pro Credits per day rather than offering an unmetered plan.
- Bring your own key is a paid feature, so the free tier cannot be pointed at your own DeepSeek account.
- Desktop only, with no editor extension, web version or team seat management as of September 2026.
- A small, young vendor with no independent review coverage yet, so there is nothing outside the vendor's own site to corroborate the cost claim.
Syft
- Lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
- Fidelity varies sharply by ecosystem. Conan for C and C++, Haskell and Terraform get cataloguer support with no licence data, no dependency relationships and no file ownership, so a C and C++ shop gets the least from it.
- Binary classification yields no licence or dependency metadata, and vendored or statically linked code is exactly where supply chain risk hides, so the blind spot and the risk overlap.
- Incorrect CPE values and CPE collisions are recorded as open issues, and since Grype matches on CPE and PURL, an inventory error becomes a false negative in the security report downstream.
- An inventory is not a risk assessment. Even a perfect bill of materials says a vulnerable version is present, never that the vulnerable function is called, and the triage burden lands entirely on the reader.
Pricing, plan by plan
Deep Code
Free- FreeFree
- Session management
- File explorer and snippets panel
- Voice input
- Pro$5/month
- All Free features
- 100 daily Pro Credits
- BYOK across DeepSeek-V4-Pro, DeepSeek-V4-Flash, GLM Coding Plan and Mimo Coding Plan
Syft
Free- SyftFree
- Apache-2.0
- No usage limits
- Community support
- Anchore Enterprise$undefined/year
- Policy enforcement and reporting
- Federal and commercial tiers
- Pricing not published, quoted on request
Which should you pick?
Choose Deep Code if
- You need deepseek-backed agent.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on Windows, macOS, Linux.
- You also want session management.
Choose Syft if
- You need multi-format output.
- You want to start without paying.
- You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
- You also want broad ecosystem coverage.
Questions people ask
- Is Deep Code or Syft better?
- Neither clearly leads. Deep Code starts at Free and Syft at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
- Which is cheaper, Deep Code or Syft?
- Deep Code starts at Free and Syft at Free.
- Does Deep Code or Syft run on more platforms?
- Deep Code runs on Windows, macOS, Linux. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
- Can I use Deep Code for free?
- Both have a free tier, so you can try either at no cost before committing.
- What is Deep Code best used for?
- Deep Code is most often used for ai-assisted coding on a budget, debugging and bug fixing, refactoring existing code, reusing prompt templates across projects. Of those, ai-assisted coding on a budget and debugging and bug fixing are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
- What can Deep Code do that Syft cannot?
- Deep Code covers DeepSeek-backed agent, Session management, File explorer, Snippets panel. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.
Answered from the vendors’ own pages
Deep Code: Which models does Deep Code run on?
DeepSeek V4 family models, with the vendor's headline built around DeepSeek V4.1. The free tier's included credits run on DeepSeek-V4-Flash. Paid users bringing their own key can also use DeepSeek-V4-Pro, the GLM Coding Plan and the Mimo Coding Plan.
SourceSyft: Does Syft find vulnerabilities?
No. It produces an inventory. Grype, from the same company, matches that inventory against vulnerability feeds. They are separate tools and the distinction is frequently lost.
Deep Code: What does Deep Code cost?
There are two tiers. Free is $0 per month and includes session management, the file explorer, snippets, voice input and weekly free credits on DeepSeek-V4-Flash. Pro is $5 per month and adds 100 daily Pro Credits plus bring-your-own-key support for multiple models.
SourceSyft: Does anything in the Anchore stack do reachability analysis?
No. Neither Syft, Grype nor the commercial Anchore platform performs call graph or reachability analysis, so none of them tells you whether a vulnerable code path is actually invoked.
Deep Code: Do I need my own API key to use it?
No. The free tier includes weekly credits and needs no credit card, so the app works without a key. Bring your own key is available on the $5 per month Pro tier and covers DeepSeek-V4-Pro, DeepSeek-V4-Flash, the GLM Coding Plan and the Mimo Coding Plan.
SourceSyft: Is it a CNCF or OpenSSF project?
No. It is single-vendor open source owned by Anchore, with no foundation governance. That is a different licence risk profile from Sigstore.
Deep Code: Which operating systems does it run on?
Windows, macOS and Linux. It is a desktop application rather than an editor extension, so it runs alongside whatever editor you already use.
SourceSyft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?
Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.
Deep Code: Is the 95 percent cheaper claim independently verified?
No. It is the vendor's own figure, based on DeepSeek token pricing against frontier model pricing. Actual savings depend on which model you compare against and how much of your usage falls inside the included credits.
SourceSyft: How do I know my SBOM is complete?
You largely cannot, which is the honest answer. Silent partial parsing is a known open defect, so a bill of materials used for compliance should be spot-checked against a known dependency list.
Related pages
Other head to heads
- Deep Code vs Coder
- Deep Code vs Refact
- Deep Code vs GitHub Copilot
- Deep Code vs CodeSandbox
- Deep Code vs StackBlitz
- Deep Code vs Moonrepo
- Deep Code vs Swagger UI
- Deep Code vs PartyKit
- Deep Code vs Pieces for Developers
- Deep Code vs Sweep
- Deep Code vs Cody
- Deep Code vs Visual Studio Code
- Deep Code vs Octopus Deploy
- Deep Code vs Okteto
- Deep Code vs OpsLevel
- Deep Code vs PhpStorm
- Deep Code vs Cosign
- Deep Code vs Sigstore
- Deep Code vs Trivy
- Deep Code vs Chainguard
- Deep Code vs Metasploit
- Deep Code vs Wireshark
- Deep Code vs Semgrep
- Deep Code vs Legit Security
- Deep Code vs OWASP ZAP
- Deep Code vs HashiCorp Vault
- Deep Code vs Bitwarden
- Deep Code vs Infisical
- Deep Code vs Tenable Nessus
- Deep Code vs Transmit Security
- Deep Code vs TrustArc
- Deep Code vs Varonis Data Security Platform
- Deep Code vs VMware Carbon Black
- Syft vs Coder
- Syft vs Refact
- Syft vs GitHub Copilot
- Syft vs CodeSandbox
- Syft vs StackBlitz
- Syft vs Moonrepo
- Syft vs Swagger UI
- Syft vs PartyKit
- Syft vs Pieces for Developers
- Syft vs Sweep
- Syft vs Cody
- Syft vs Visual Studio Code
- Syft vs Octopus Deploy
- Syft vs Okteto
- Syft vs OpsLevel
- Syft vs PhpStorm
- Syft vs Cosign
- Syft vs Sigstore
- Syft vs Trivy
- Syft vs Chainguard
- Syft vs Metasploit
- Syft vs Wireshark
- Syft vs Semgrep
- Syft vs Legit Security
- Syft vs OWASP ZAP
- Syft vs HashiCorp Vault
- Syft vs Bitwarden
- Syft vs Infisical
- Syft vs Tenable Nessus
- Syft vs Transmit Security
- Syft vs TrustArc
- Syft vs Varonis Data Security Platform
- Syft vs VMware Carbon Black
