CAST Highlight vs Veracode comparison

Read 208 Veracode reviews

19,227 Views
4,422 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

CAST Highlight

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

Veracode and CAST Highlight compete in the application security testing space. Veracode seems to have the upper hand due to its comprehensive scanning capabilities and extensive integration options, making it a strong choice for regulatory compliance and SDLC integration.

Features: Veracode provides comprehensive static, dynamic, and manual scanning capabilities, which are crucial for regulatory compliance and SDLC integration. It supports a broad range of programming languages and offers robust integration with IDEs and APIs. Veracode is valued for its ease of use, especially its ability to minimize false positives, along with features for sandbox scanning and vulnerability management. CAST Highlight offers fast, automated code scanning and portfolio assessments, providing a high-level overview rather than the in-depth analysis delivered by Veracode.

Room for Improvement: Veracode faces issues with false positives and complex integrations, leading to potential usability and reporting problems. Improvements in scanning speeds and language support are needed. CAST Highlight is criticized for its abstract reporting and lack of detailed analysis capabilities, with its pricing model viewed as inflexible, limiting deeper analyses without significant cost.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Veracode can be deployed across various cloud environments—public, private, and hybrid—offering adaptability but with potential complexity in implementation. While its technical support receives mixed reviews, its quick response time is praised, despite some inconsistencies. CAST Highlight shares similar support complexities and the need for potential service improvements according to its users.

Pricing and ROI: Veracode's pricing is perceived as high but justified by its comprehensive features and robust security assurances, making it less accessible for small businesses but valuable for larger enterprises in risk management and operational efficiencies. CAST Highlight is considered more cost-effective than its sibling CAST AIP, but still requires careful cost-benefit analysis. Veracode is frequently cited for delivering more measurable benefits in reducing security vulnerabilities.

To learn more, read our detailed CAST Highlight vs. Veracode Report (Updated: March 2026).

CAST Highlight vs. Veracode

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,797 peers since 2012

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

CAST Highlight

Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

16th

Average Rating

7.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Veracode

Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

3rd

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), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of March 2026, in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category, the mindshare of CAST Highlight is 1.2%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 6.2%, down from 10.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Veracode	6.2%
CAST Highlight	1.2%
Other	92.6%

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

Featured Reviews

Jayanti Rode

Technical Associate Manager at Accenture

Identifies migration blockers and boosters while facing challenges with platform-specific roadblocks

The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Windows-specific blockers or Linux-specific blockers, as I often work with only one platform at a time. If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time. Understanding only the OS-specific blockers means I would avoid resolving irrelevant issues, thus saving time. Initially, I receive a response from support, however, if there is involvement from R&D or other teams, it may take longer than expected. The support team is challenging when sharing source code. As this is a static code analysis tool, it sometimes requires source code for R&D. However, CAST clients may be restricted from sharing due to business logic and nondisclosure agreements. This creates a challenge, and I may have to share pseudo code or seek client approval, risking escalation.

Read full review

reviewer2703864

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.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization."

"In cloud migration, I use CAST highlight to identify blockers, which are the negative road patterns, and also the boosters, which are positive code patterns."

"It offers good performance."

"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."

"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."

"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."

"CAST Highlight provides a clear overview of the role portfolio and allows users to assess the overall quality of the environment. Users can see where improvements are needed and follow up on trends of the application."

"The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."

"Before Veracode, the application was deployed to the production server and there would be a lot of bugs and issues. Once we implemented the Veracode scan, the full deployment issues were drastically reduced."

"In pipeline scanning, there is a configuration that can be set with respect to the security level of the flaw. If there is a high or a critical issue, there's a way the build can be failed and blocked before going into production."

"The most valuable features include the total developer experience, along with regulator exposure and DevOps pipeline. It encompasses everything as an enterprise solution."

"The capability to identify vulnerable code is the most valuable feature of Veracode."

"The visibility into application status helps reduce risk exposure for our software. Today, any findings provided by the DAST are reviewed by the developers and we have internal processes in place to correct those findings before there can be a release. So it absolutely does prevent us from releasing weak code."

"Veracode has good support for microservices, and I also like the sandbox environment. For example, when introducing a new component, we can scan it in a sandbox environment. It will not impact the main environment. When our team fixes it, they. can push it to the production environment when the results are acceptable."

"One benefit is that we have automated the scanning process."

"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."

More Veracode pros

Cons

"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."

"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."

"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."

"There could be potential improvements or additional features added to CAST Highlight to make it better."

"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."

"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."

"If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time."

"We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time."

"The security labs integration has room for improvement."

"Veracode needs to improve its integration with other tools."

"It's taking too much time to do a quality scan."

"Maybe the boards could be made easier to understand or easier to customize."

"One of the most important areas that need improvement for Veracode is its DaaS. Veracode's DAST engines are primitive."

"It can be a bit complex because it takes a lot of time to have it complete the task."

"There should be more APIs, especially in SCA, to get some results or automate some things."

More Veracode cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."

"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."

"The licensing cost for Veracode is fair."

"It's very expensive, especially when you are a very small organization. If you're using Veracode at an individual level, for example, you're a developer or you run agents, the pricing might not affect you, but if you're using it at a company level to troubleshoot security issues, the pricing is not quite favorable. It may affect ROI."

"They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey."

"Veracode is expensive. Some of its products are expensive. I don't think it's way more expensive than its competitors. The dynamic is definitely worth it, as I think it's cheaper than the competitors. The static scan is a little bit more expensive, around 20 percent more expensive. The manual pen test is more expensive, but it is an expensive service because it's a manual pen test and we also do retests. I don't think it is way more expensive than the competitors, but it's about 15 to 20 percent more expensive."

"Pricing/licensing is complicated."

"It is very reasonably priced compared to what we were paying our previous vendor. For the same price, we are getting much more value and reducing our AppSec costs from 40 to 50 percent."

"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."

"They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works."

More Veracode pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

884,797 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

20%

Computer Software Company

Government

Outsourcing Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	5

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	69
Midsize Enterprise	45
Large Enterprise	114

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CAST Highlight?

The pricing of CAST Highlight was not considered expensive or cheap, and no specific comment was made about the setup cost.

What needs improvement with CAST Highlight?

What is your primary use case for CAST Highlight?

For CAST, I use it in cloud migration roadmap and in open source safety issues. These are my two main use cases.

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. SonarQube has a great community edition, which is open-source and free. Easy to use...

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 vulnerabilities.

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.

SonarQube vs CAST Highlight

Comparisons

Compared 14% of the time

Snyk vs CAST Highlight

Compared 13% of the time

Black Duck SCA vs CAST Highlight

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmarx One vs CAST Highlight

Compared 9% of the time

Coverity Static vs CAST Highlight

Compared 5% of the time

More CAST Highlight Competitors

SonarQube vs Veracode

Compared 9% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Veracode

Compared 7% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode

Compared 4% of the time

Coverity Static vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

More Veracode Competitors

Product Reports

Download CAST Highlight product report

CAST Highlight

March 2026

Download Veracode product report

February 2026

Also Known As

No data available

Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect

Overview

CAST Highlight is a SaaS software intelligence product for performing rapid application portfolio analysis. It automatically analyzes source code of hundreds of applications in a week for Cloud Readiness, Software Composition Analysis (Open Source risks), Resiliency, and Technical Debt. Objective software insights from automated source code analysis combined with built-in qualitative surveys for business context enable more informed decision-making about application portfolios.

CAST is the software intelligence category leader. CAST technology can see inside custom applications with MRI-like precision, automatically generating intelligence about their inner workings - composition, architecture, transaction flows, cloud readiness, structural flaws, legal and security risks. It’s becoming essential for faster modernization for cloud, raising the speed and efficiency of Software Engineering, better open source risk control, and accurate technical due diligence. CAST operates globally with offices in North America, Europe, India, China. Visit www.castsoftware.com.

CAST

Veracode is a leading provider of application security solutions, offering tools to identify, mitigate, and prevent vulnerabilities across the software development lifecycle. Its cloud-based platform integrates security into DevOps workflows, helping organizations ensure that their code remains secure and compliant with industry standards.

Veracode supports multiple application security testing types, including static analysis (SAST), dynamic analysis (DAST), software composition analysis (SCA), and manual penetration testing. These tools are designed to help developers detect vulnerabilities early in development while maintaining speed in deployment. Veracode also emphasizes scalability, offering features for enterprises that manage a large number of applications across different teams. Its robust reporting and analytics capabilities allow organizations to continuously monitor their security posture and track progress toward remediation.

What are the key features of Veracode?

Static Analysis (SAST) - Scans source code for vulnerabilities before deployment.
Dynamic Analysis (DAST) - Examines applications in a running state to detect flaws in real-time.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) - Identifies risks in open-source libraries and third-party components.
Manual Penetration Testing - Offers expert analysis for more complex vulnerabilities.
Integrations with DevOps tools - Seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines for automated security checks.

What benefits should users consider in Veracode reviews?

Early detection of vulnerabilities - Helps developers fix security issues early in the development process.
Scalability - Supports organizations with large-scale application portfolios.
Compliance support - Ensures applications meet various security standards and regulations.
Developer training - Provides tools for educating developers on secure coding practices.
Comprehensive reporting - Offers detailed reports that track remediation and risk trends.

Veracode is widely adopted in industries like finance, healthcare, and government, where compliance and security are critical. It helps these organizations maintain strict security standards while enabling rapid development through its integration with Agile and DevOps methodologies.

Veracode helps businesses secure their applications efficiently, ensuring they can deliver safe and compliant software at scale.

Sample Customers

Wells Fargo, Bank of NY Mellon, Northern Trust, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, BMW, AT&T, US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, John Hancock, Marsh & McLennan, Ernst & Young, PwC, Volkswagen, Boston Consulting Group, London Stock Exchange, Telefonica, Saur France, Total Energies France, SNCF

Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.