Syft vs cdxgen: SBOM Generators Compared
Both generate software bills of materials. Syft (Anchore) excels at container and OS package cataloging and outputs SPDX and CycloneDX; cdxgen (OWASP) focuses on CycloneDX with very broad language and ecosystem coverage.
Syft and cdxgen both produce SBOMs so you know what is in your builds and can feed vulnerability scanners. Syft is strong on container images and OS packages; cdxgen is strong on application dependencies across many languages. Here is the honest comparison.
| Syft | cdxgen | |
|---|---|---|
| Formats | SPDX + CycloneDX + Syft JSON | CycloneDX (primary) |
| Strength | Container + OS package cataloging | Broad app language/ecosystem coverage |
| Ecosystem | Anchore (pairs with Grype) | OWASP (pairs with Dep-Track) |
| Container images | First-class | Supported |
| Language depth | Many ecosystems | Very broad, many languages |
| Integrations | Grype, Attestations | OWASP Dependency-Track |
Container vs application focus
Syft is excellent at scanning container images and OS-level packages (apk, deb, rpm) as well as language dependencies, and it pairs naturally with Grype for vulnerability scanning. cdxgen casts a very wide net across application ecosystems and languages, which is handy for polyglot codebases, and integrates tightly with OWASP Dependency-Track for continuous monitoring.
Formats and downstream tools
Syft emits both SPDX and CycloneDX, giving flexibility for whatever consumer you use. cdxgen centers on CycloneDX, which is a strong fit if your pipeline standardizes there. Choose partly by which SBOM format and downstream tools (Grype, Dependency-Track, attestation flows) you already use.
In CI
Generate an SBOM on every build, store it as an artifact, and feed it to a scanner. Syft plus Grype is a common pipeline for container images; cdxgen plus Dependency-Track suits ongoing app dependency monitoring.
The verdict
Choose Syft for container and OS package SBOMs with SPDX/CycloneDX output and a clean path to Grype; choose cdxgen for broad application-language coverage and OWASP Dependency-Track. Both are solid, so pick by format and downstream tooling.