Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Grype vs MetricStream

Grype logo

Grype

Cybersecurity

Vulnerability scanner for container images and filesystems

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
MetricStream logo

MetricStream

Cybersecurity

Enterprise GRC suite for large regulated organisations, with implementation costs that exceed the licence

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Grype has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Grype depends on public vulnerability databases, so coverage and false positives vary by ecosystem; MetricStream implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.
  • They diverge on capability: Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Grype and MetricStream actually diverge.

Attributes where Grype and MetricStream differ
AttributeGrypeMetricStream
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsLinux, macOS, Windows, DockerWeb

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

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 Grype

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

Only in MetricStream

  • Enterprise and operational risk
  • Regulatory compliance
  • Internal audit
  • Third-party risk
  • Cyber risk quantification
  • Policy and case management
  • Content libraries
  • ESG reporting

What people use each for

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

Grype

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

MetricStream

  • A multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examinersnot Grype
  • An insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the boardnot Grype
  • A pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affectednot Grype
  • An organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheetsnot Grype

Where each one falls short

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

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

MetricStream

  • Implementation typically costs one and a half to two and a half times the first year licence, so a one million dollar licence carries a one and a half to two and a half million dollar rollout that rarely appears in the initial business case.
  • Full deployment takes six to eighteen months, during which the organisation runs old and new processes in parallel and the promised efficiency gain is negative.
  • Per-user pricing in the low thousands per year per seat discourages giving access to the first line of defence, which is precisely where risk data originates, so many deployments end up with data still arriving by spreadsheet.
  • Configuration flexibility comes at the price of specialist skills, and organisations become dependent on MetricStream partners or a small internal team, making later changes slow and expensive.
  • The interface and workflow feel enterprise-heavy next to modern compliance tools, and infrequent business users find it hard, which suppresses the participation the platform is meant to enable.

Pricing, plan by plan

Grype

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

MetricStream

On request
  • MetricStream GRC$undefined/year
    • Enterprise risk, audit, compliance and third-party modules
    • Regulatory content libraries
    • Multi-entity and multi-jurisdiction support

Which should you pick?

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

Choose MetricStream if

  • You need enterprise and operational risk.
  • You also want regulatory compliance.
MetricStream review

Questions people ask

Is Grype or MetricStream better?
Neither clearly leads. Grype starts at Free and MetricStream at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Grype or MetricStream?
Grype has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Grype and On request for MetricStream.
Does Grype or MetricStream run on more platforms?
Grype runs on Linux, macOS, Windows, Docker. MetricStream runs on Web.
Can I use Grype for free?
Yes. Grype has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. MetricStream starts at On request.
What is Grype best used for?
Grype is most often used for re-scanning stored sboms as new cves are published, without rebuilding images, failing ci when a build introduces a known vulnerability, auditing what is actually installed inside a third-party image. Of those, re-scanning stored sboms as new cves are published, without rebuilding images and failing ci when a build introduces a known vulnerability are not what MetricStream is typically brought in for.
What can Grype do that MetricStream cannot?
Grype covers Image and filesystem scanning, SBOM-driven, Wide ecosystem coverage, Pipeline friendly. MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Regulatory compliance, Internal audit, Third-party risk.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Grype: Is Grype free?

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

MetricStream: What does MetricStream cost?

It is quoted. Market data suggests roughly 75,000 to 150,000 US dollars a year for small enterprise deployments, 250,000 to 500,000 for medium and 750,000 upwards for large.

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.

MetricStream: How long is implementation?

Six to eighteen months for a full platform deployment, and the services cost usually exceeds the first year licence.

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.

MetricStream: Is it right for a mid-market company?

Usually not. Its depth suits organisations with several regulators and formal three lines of defence structures.

MetricStream: Does it replace SOC 2 automation tools?

It can cover the framework, but it is not designed for the automated evidence collection those tools do cheaply.

Share

Related pages

More on Grype

More on MetricStream

Keep looking

Other head to heads