Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

MetricStream vs Syft

MetricStream logo

MetricStream

Cybersecurity

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

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Syft has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: 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.; 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: MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Syft covers Multi-format output.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which MetricStream and Syft actually diverge.

Attributes where MetricStream and Syft differ
AttributeMetricStreamSyft
Starting priceOn requestFree
Pricing modelquoteOpen source, no licence fee
Free tierNoYes
PlatformsWebmacOS, Linux, Windows, Docker

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 MetricStream

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

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.

MetricStream

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

Syft

  • Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot MetricStream
  • Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot MetricStream
  • Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot MetricStream
  • Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot MetricStream

Where each one falls short

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

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.

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

MetricStream

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

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 MetricStream if

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

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.
Syft review

Questions people ask

Is MetricStream or Syft better?
Neither clearly leads. MetricStream starts at On request and Syft at Free, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, MetricStream or Syft?
Syft has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at On request for MetricStream and Free for Syft.
Does MetricStream or Syft run on more platforms?
MetricStream runs on Web. Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
Can I use Syft for free?
Yes. Syft has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. MetricStream starts at On request.
What is MetricStream best used for?
MetricStream is most often used for a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners, an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board, a pharmaceutical company that must track regulatory change across jurisdictions and show what each change affected, an organisation whose three lines of defence must share one risk taxonomy rather than three overlapping spreadsheets. Of those, a multinational bank mapping one control set against obligations from several regulators and needing to evidence the mapping to examiners and an insurer consolidating separate risk, audit and vendor systems that currently produce contradictory numbers to the board are not what Syft is typically brought in for.
What can MetricStream do that Syft cannot?
MetricStream covers Enterprise and operational risk, Regulatory compliance, Internal audit, Third-party risk. Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

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.

Syft: 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.

MetricStream: How long is implementation?

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

Syft: 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.

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.

Syft: 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.

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.

Syft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?

Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.

Syft: 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.

Share

Related pages

More on MetricStream

More on Syft

Keep looking

Other head to heads