Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apiiro vs Veracode comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto N...
Sponsored
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
6th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
5.7
Number of Reviews
11
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (27th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (12th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (7th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (6th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (4th)
Apiiro
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
7th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.4
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (24th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (15th), API Security (15th), Software Supply Chain Security (10th), Risk-Based Vulnerability Management (18th)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st)
 

Featured Reviews

SJ
Technical Solutions Architect at IBM
Cloud security has improved as AI-driven runtime protection detects threats and reduces incidents
In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks could be improved or enhanced in various ways. I don't have an idea about that yet because for that you actually need to use two or three different other tools to make a basic comparison. If you ask me how good the tool is, I would fairly rate it quite high. The tool is very popular, and customers can already see that it is one of the cloud leaders in the security space. The platform had a very good feature which provides documentation links about how to use a specific feature on the UI. It takes you to the proper documentation page where it suggests what to do and tells you about the steps that need to be done for a resource deployment. My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella. It has XDR, XSOAR, and Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks. Before, we used to have separate modules and separate environments for each of these capabilities or features. Right now, it is a little complex and users would take their own time to know the tool better. This is something that would have been way better, but I would say there would be different opinions on this. Talking about user-friendliness, it has decreased now.
Kunal M - PeerSpot reviewer
Capability Center Leader, ETRM Platforms at Shell
Comprehensive risk analysis helps identify key performance trends but report access needs improvement
My first feedback for Apiiro is that it is very slow, extremely slow. The moment I select from the entire list of repositories in my vertical, which is almost more than 400 repositories, it takes a lot of time for me to load the report. Sometimes it fails. I do not have Role-Based Access Control (RBAC). It's only given to the application security team, and Apiiro as a vendor does not have the rollback access control enabled for the clients, so that would have given me access to the reports tab, which would have made my life easier. Currently, I have to go to the risks tab to pull out all this information. I started exploring dashboards with Copilot. I need to reach out to the Apiiro teams to see if I can get an access token so that I can pull out a Power BI dashboard. I think Apiiro definitely has its own capabilities, but if there are access tokens that teams can use to build a custom dashboard, that would be great. This might already exist, but that is something which will ease the vulnerability management day-to-day activities.
reviewer2703864 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Security Architecture at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Onboarding developers successfully while improving code security through IDE integration
Regarding room for improvement, we have some problems when onboarding new projects because the build process has to be done in a certain way, as Veracode analyzes the binaries and not the code by itself alone. If the process is not configured correctly, it doesn't work. That's one of the things that we are discussing with Veracode. Something positive that we've been able to do is submit formal feature requests to them, and they are working on them; they've already solved some of them. This encourages us to propose new ideas and improvements. Another improvement that we asked for this use case is to be able to configure how Veracode Fix proposes and fixes because sometimes it makes proposals using libraries that go against our architecture design made by the enterprise architecture team. For example, we want them to propose using another library, and that's something we already asked Veracode, and they are working on it. We want to specify when you see this kind of vulnerability, you can only propose these two options.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The most valuable features I have found in Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks are those that we provided to customers in a stock environment, as we have done some POCs and tried to check how it can help different organizations, and this same solution has been positioned for multiple customers."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks' cloud runtime security in terms of stopping attacks in real time is impressive."
"The capabilities of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks are valuable because it is the best product in the market."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks has impacted our organization positively by keeping our machines secure and our team using the dashboard to find issues quickly."
"Previously with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, I deployed this product for one of my customers, and after three to four months, they said that previously they had around four hours of MTTR, and now it has reduced to just 15 to 20 minutes."
"I have seen several benefits from using Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks: It was easy to use and easy to migrate from the IBM platform."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"The most beneficial aspect of Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks and Palo Alto in general is that there is a single platform for all cloud providers for securitization."
"The workflow automation is likely the best aspect of the solution."
"Apiiro's secrets detection feature has saved us several times, which we appreciate greatly."
"The positive impact I have seen from working with Apiiro for my company includes the metrics that we get from Apiiro, which have been extremely helpful."
"Scanning of .war and .jar is key for us."
"The Security Labs [is] where I have the developers training and constantly improving their security, and remembering their security techniques. That way, they are more proactive and make sure things are correct. They're faster because they're doing it in the first place."
"All three of Veracode's offerings are valuable: SCA, SAST, and DAST. It helps identify security loopholes right in the development phase, allowing developers to get feedback around what kind of vulnerabilities exist as soon as they check in the code or even before that in their IDE."
"Veracode has a nice API that they provide to allow for custom things to be built, or automation. We actually have integrated Veracode into our software development cycle using their API. We actually are able to automatically, every time a new build of a software is completed, submit that application, kick off a scan, and we get results in a much more automated fashion."
"I don't have much experience with the solution yet. We're looking at integrating Manual Penetration Testing with JIRA and Bamboo and then building that into a CICD model, so the integration is the most valuable feature so far."
"The user interface is quick, familiar, and user-friendly and makes navigation to other software very easy."
"It gives me an idea about the most important vulnerabilities and fast remediation tips."
"There is a single area on the dashboard where you can get a full view of all of the tests and the results from everything. There is a nice, very simple graphic that shows you the types of vulnerabilities that were found, their severity, the scoring, and in what part of the code they were found. All the details are together in one place."
 

Cons

"In my opinion, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks can be improved by addressing forensic information collection and storage, although I cannot suggest specific things right now, based on what customers might need."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is not the cheapest solution in the market, but I know that is the best solution for SOC and Cloud once have all tools to connect cloud issues with SOC procedures, because we are partners with T-Systems."
"My thoughts about improving the product which I believe could greatly aid vendors is that it used to be a very user-friendly tool, but now they have incorporated everything under one umbrella."
"The negative aspects or areas for improvement in the product include the fact that the cost might be a bit high, which challenges commercials, but not technically."
"Overall, I rate Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks as an eight out of ten. I think that it could improve on price, as I know that the Google solution has the best price, and this is one of the conditions."
"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"I would like support for our self-hosted Git server, other than GitHub, just regular Git."
"User management is a little bit clunky."
"If Veracode was more diversified, as far as the number of platforms and the number of applications it could do in our favor, we would be using it even more. But there are a number of platforms it doesn't support. For example, I know they support C+, .NET, and Java, but there are certain platforms they don't support and that was disappointing."
"The reports on offer are too verbose."
"Its cost and the long scanning times for large applications are the areas for improvement."
"An area for improvement I found in Veracode is the connectivity because currently, my company uses a plugin for the dev-ops cloud-based connectivity. A pretty helpful feature would be if Veracode gives a direct code for connecting to the Oracle server directly and authenticating it via a unique server."
"It could have better integration with our pipeline. If we could have better integration with our application pipeline, e.g., Jira, Bamboo, or Azure DevOps, then that will be very helpful. Right now, it is quite hard to integrate the solution into our existing pipeline."
"I would also like to see some improvement in the speed. That is really the only complaint, but in all reality we have a massive Java application that needs to be scanned. Our developers are saying, "It takes 72 hours to scan it." That is probably the nature of the beast, and I'm actually pretty accepting of that time frame, but since it's a complaint that I get, faster is always better. I don't necessarily think that the speed is bad as it is, just that faster would be better."
"There are few languages that take time for scanning. It covers the majority of languages from C to Scala, but it doesn't support certain languages and the newer versions of certain languages. For example, it doesn't support SAP and new JavaScript frameworks such as Node.js and React JS. They can include support for these. If you go to their website, you can see the list of languages that are currently supported. The false-positive rates are also something they can work on."
"One area for improvement is the navigation in the UI. For junior developers or newcomers to the team, it can be confusing. The UI doesn't clearly bundle together certain elements associated with a scan. While running a scan, there are various aspects linked to it, but in the UI, they appear separate. It would be beneficial if they could redesign the UI to make it more intuitive for users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
Information not available
"Depending on the number of users, my company makes payments toward the solution's licensing costs."
"The pricing for Veracode is high, making it difficult for beginners to afford."
"I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others."
"Veracode is affordable for large organizations, but its pricing may be out of reach for small and medium companies."
"I don't really get too involved in the cost sides of things that's in my job, I'm more of a technical focus, but I have heard from my manager and a couple other people that the solution is quite expensive."
"It is expensive. It depends on the use case, but it is very hard to find a pricing page on their website. Instead, they need to analyze your use case, but without knowing the entire project and how you're going to be using Veracode, how many scans you're going to do, if yours is a small business, it is very expensive and it affects ROI."
"We're very comfortable with their model. We think they're a good value. We worked very closely with Veracode on understanding their license model, understanding what comprises the fee and what does not. With their assistance in design, we decomposed our application in a way where we are scanning a very significant amount of code without wasting their capacity and generating redundant reported issues. You scan in profiles, per se. And we work with them, in their offices, to design the most effective approach. So the advice I would have for customers is, you can get up and live fast, but work closely with Veracode to refine the method you use for scanning and the way you compile the applications. There's a concept called entry-point scanning, and that's probably not used well by the rest of their customers. We see our licensing as a good value because we leverage it heavily."
"Licensing cost is on a yearly basis and there are no additional costs, the pricing is straightforward."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
9%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Performing Arts
8%
Computer Software Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business6
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise4
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise45
Large Enterprise114
 

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
The solution is costly, with high-end capabilities suitable for enterprises. It is less affordable for startups or sm...
What needs improvement with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
As per my experience with Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks, the UI could be simpler. There are few features which a...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
My use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is for CSPM, application security, and IAM. I use it for checking ...
What needs improvement with Apiiro?
My first feedback for Apiiro is that it is very slow, extremely slow. The moment I select from the entire list of rep...
What is your primary use case for Apiiro?
My only use case is the reporting, which is correct. My role is limited because this is an additional role that I do ...
What advice do you have for others considering Apiiro?
I haven't explored Apiiro's advanced risk analysis features. I have not used the compliance monitoring feature of Api...
Which gives you more for your money - SonarQube or Veracode?
SonarQube is easy to deploy and configure, and also integrates well with other tools to do quality code analysis. Son...
What do you like most about Veracode Static Analysis?
I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabil...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Apiiro Control Plane (ASOC), Apiiro API Security (SAST), Apiiro Open Source (SCA)
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Morgan Stanley, Rakuten, Jack Henry, SoFi, Colgate, Navan
Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.
Find out what your peers are saying about Apiiro vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: March 2026.
884,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.