Aikido Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vs Stowaway: Side-by-Side Comparison (2026)

Development teams at startups and SMBs who need SAST without the operational overhead will see immediate ROI from Aikido Static Application Security Testing; the AI-powered false positive filtering cuts the triage noise that kills adoption in resource-constrained shops, and pull request integration means developers catch issues in their workflow instead of in a separate tool. The 16-language coverage handles most polyglot codebases, and automated fix generation reduces the friction of pushing remediation back to engineers. Skip this if you're an enterprise with mature AppSec practices and heavy custom rule requirements; you'll want deeper customization and larger vendor support teams than Aikido's 187-person operation can sustain at scale. Mobile security teams building Android apps need Stowaway because it catches malware signatures and suspicious code patterns that slip past generic static analyzers, and it costs nothing to integrate into CI/CD. The free pricing means you can run it on every build without budget justification, which matters when your threat model centers on repackaged apps and supply chain contamination. Skip this if you need iOS coverage or require post-deployment runtime monitoring; Stowaway is analysis-only and Android-specific.

Based on our analysis of NIST CSF 2.0 coverage, core features, integrations, company size fit, here is our conclusion: