Contrast Security Assess vs Ixia BreakingPoint comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Contrast Security and Keysight Technologies are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Contrast Security is ranked #22 with an average rating of 7.8, while Keysight Technologies is ranked #33. Contrast Security holds a 1.5% mindshare in SAST, compared to Keysight Technologies’s 0.7% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Keysight Technologies users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 15 Contrast Security Assess reviews

5,680 Views
3,124 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Ixia BreakingPoint

Read 8 Ixia BreakingPoint reviews

2,107 Views
1,896 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Ixia BreakingPoint

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Ixia BreakingPoint and Contrast Security Assess are competitors in the network and application security sectors. Ixia BreakingPoint often takes the lead through its robust network simulation, while Contrast Security Assess excels in ease of integration and use for application security.

Features: Ixia BreakingPoint provides extensive protocol support, realistic attack simulations, and comprehensive network testing analytics. Contrast Security Assess integrates seamlessly with development workflows, offers continuous vulnerability assessments, and is simple to use, aligning closely with software development needs.

Room for Improvement: Ixia BreakingPoint could enhance user experience involving configuration processes, simplify its interface, and reduce setup complexity. Contrast Security Assess might expand its supported programming languages, offer more detailed reporting, and improve adaptability to various developmental environments.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Ixia BreakingPoint features strong deployment support but faces user critique for its setup complexity. Contrast Security Assess follows a straightforward deployment process and benefits from responsive customer service, providing notable user satisfaction.

Pricing and ROI: Ixia BreakingPoint justifies its premium setup cost with extensive network testing features, promising a strong return on investment. Contrast Security Assess offers competitive pricing, supporting effective vulnerability management for positive ROI, appealing to a cost-efficient cybersecurity strategy.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint Report (Updated: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,769 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

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

22nd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (23rd)

Ixia BreakingPoint

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

33rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

7.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.5%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ixia BreakingPoint is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Contrast Security Assess	1.5%
Ixia BreakingPoint	0.7%
Other	97.8%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

Ryan Flake

Threat & Vulnerability Management Senior Analyst at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees

Real-time assessments have improved remediation speed and reduced time spent on authentication issues

I do find that here and there with Contrast Security Assess there are user interface issues, particularly with how they work with libraries. The way that it works is people have access to library data for all applications, not just the applications that they should have access to. However, they are trying to fix that. The way the libraries are handled with Contrast Security Assess could use some work. I know that there is an additional service tier that allows for more in-depth library data. These are small things. Contrast support has been great in fixing any issues or getting back to us with questions. They seem to really be dedicated to the product.

Read full review

Sai Prasad

Staff QA Engineer at Virsec

Works better for testing traffic, mix profile, and enrollment scenarios than other solutions

Once, when I raised a ticket regarding a hardware or software issue, the solution's support team visited our company to discuss and find out ways to solve the problem. Sometimes, they asked us to send several photos from the back and front end to identify the issue. It was time-consuming as we were occupied with some other testing simultaneously. Instead, it would have been great if they could have visited our company and rectified the problem.

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 accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"You cannot get much better than Contrast Security Assess for large deployments of applications and also critical applications."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"Contrast Security Assess has positively impacted my organization by providing more control over secure software development."

"We use the Contrast OSS feature that allows us to look at third-party, open-source software libraries, because it has a cool interface where you can look at all the different libraries. It has some really cool additional features where it gives us how many instances in which something has been used... It tells us it has been used 10 times out of 20 workloads, for example. Then we know for sure that OSS is being used."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

"No other tool does the runtime scanning like Contrast does. Other static analysis tools do static scanning, but Contrast is runtime analysis, when the routes are exercised. That's when the scan happens. This is a tool that has a very unique capability compared to other tools. That's what I like most about Contrast, that it's runtime."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"What Ixia BreakingPoint brings to the end customer is the use case."

"BPS VE evaluation was used for testing LTE Network elements with a focus on user plane testing BPS VE along with its UI and new concepts to reduce the complexity of manual testing to a large extent."

"The most valuable feature is Layer 7 traffic generation such as Facebook, Netflix, WhatsApp."

"The DDoS testing module is useful and quick to use."

"The solution has many protocols and options, making it very flexible."

"The most valuable feature of Ixia BreakingPoint is the ransomware and malware database for simulated attacks."

"There is a virtual version of the product which is scaled to 100s of virtual testing blades."

"It is a scalable solution."

More Ixia BreakingPoint pros

Cons

"I do find that here and there with Contrast Security Assess there are user interface issues, particularly with how they work with libraries."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

"Regarding Contrast Security Assess's AI capabilities, I think they are missing a huge opportunity because they could lead the way in automatic testing and AI security testing, but currently, they do not offer this functionality, which is a shame."

"The solution needs to improve flexibility...The scalability of the product is a problem in the solution, especially from a commercial perspective."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The integration could improve in Ixia BreakingPoint."

"The price could be better."

"The SSL simulation is realistic but some kinds of tests work imperfectly."

"The production traffic simulations are not realistic enough for some types of DDoS attacks."

"They should improve UI mode packages for the users."

"The solution originally was hard to configure; I'm not sure if they've updated this to make it simpler, but if not, it's something that could be streamlined."

"The flash GUI has room for improvement."

"The quality of the traffic generation could be improved with Ixia BreakingPoint, i.e. to get closer to being accurate in what a real user will do."

More Ixia BreakingPoint cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"The solution is expensive."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The price is high. We pay for the license monthly."

"The solution is expensive."

"There is no differentiation in licenses for Breaking Point. For one license, you will get all the features. There is no complexity in that."

"or us, the pricing is somewhere around $12,000 a year. I'm unsure as to what new licenses now cost."

"The price of the solution is expensive."

"We have a one year subscription license for $25,000 US Dollars."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

13%

Financial Services Firm

13%

Comms Service Provider

11%

Healthcare Company

Outsourcing Company

14%

Comms Service Provider

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	3
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	11

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	7
Large Enterprise	3

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Contrast Security Assess?

I was not involved in the negotiation of pricing for Contrast Security Assess, but I am somewhat familiar with setup cost and licensing. Licensing costs are fairly high compared to other DAST and S...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

I don't use Contrast Security Assess anymore, so I cannot comment on how it can be improved; I stopped using it four years ago, but at the time, I think the UI could be improved to be more friendly...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

I don't remember specific metrics regarding the outcomes we saw, but I can tell that the false positive rate was a third compared to a static analysis scanner; we used to have automation testing ex...

See all answers

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

Comparisons

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 9% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 6% of the time

Mend.io vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Quotium Seeker vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Oligo vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Appvance AIQ Platform vs Ixia BreakingPoint

Compared 13% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Ixia BreakingPoint

Compared 13% of the time

SonarQube vs Ixia BreakingPoint

Compared 8% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Ixia BreakingPoint

Compared 8% of the time

More Ixia BreakingPoint Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

October 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

October 2026

Download Ixia BreakingPoint product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

No data available

Overview

Contrast Security Assess is an IAST platform known for accurate vulnerability detection. It integrates into development workflows, offering real-time insights into security issues with minimal false positives, supporting legacy applications and enhancing code security visibility.

Designed to integrate seamlessly into DevOps workflows, Contrast Security Assess automates real-time vulnerability detection and reduces false positives through its powerful IAST features. By continuously monitoring vulnerabilities, it provides a robust option for securing legacy applications and identifying vulnerabilities without lengthy scans. This cloud-hosted platform supports numerous programming languages, making it versatile for security testing across enterprise environments. Users benefit from detailed reports that pinpoint exact code locations requiring remediation, enhancing speed and efficiency in addressing security concerns.

What are the key features of Contrast Security Assess?

IAST Technology: Delivers accurate vulnerability detection with reduced false positives.
Seamless Integration: Integrates into development processes, supporting real-time vulnerability detection.
Open Source Security: Analyzes third-party libraries for vulnerabilities.
Continuous Monitoring: Provides valuable insights with real-time security feedback for developers.
API Interface: Enhances operational efficiency and streamlining with minimal false positives.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Enhanced Security Visibility: Offers comprehensive insights across application environments.
Speed and Efficiency: Quick identification and remediation of vulnerabilities accelerate development.
Operational Streamlining: Seamless integration into DevOps workflows improves productivity.
Legacy Application Support: Effective for securing existing applications with ongoing monitoring.

Companies in industries requiring high levels of application security, such as finance and healthcare, implement Contrast Security Assess for its ability to enhance visibility and detect vulnerabilities early in the development lifecycle. Its seamless integration with DevOps processes makes it ideal for environments that prioritize agility while maintaining stringent security standards.

Contrast Security

Ixia BreakingPoint delivers comprehensive Layer 7 traffic generation and DDoS testing, enabling users to simulate applications like Facebook and Netflix, test IDP scenarios, and utilize extensive ransomware and malware databases for thorough attack simulations.

Ixia BreakingPoint is known for its advanced capabilities in network and security testing, offering Layer 7 traffic generation, DDoS testing, and cloud application validation. It supports multiple protocols, enabling organizations to conduct stress testing, security validation, and traffic simulation effectively. Users find it valuable for evaluating SDWAN solutions and performing traffic impact analysis on applications and infrastructures. Its realistic configuration flow supports collaboration with virtualization teams, and deployment requires minimal personnel involvement, with a growing focus on virtual platforms.

What are the standout features of Ixia BreakingPoint?

Layer 7 Traffic Generation: Simulates a wide range of applications for thorough testing.
DDoS Testing Modules: Offers robust denial-of-service attack simulations.
Application Simulation: Supports popular services like Facebook and Netflix.
IDP Scenario Testing: Provides flexibility across multiple protocols.
Ransomware and Malware Databases: Enhances attack simulation realism.

What benefits should users look for in reviews?

Realistic Configuration: Supports effective collaboration and accurate testing outcomes.
Minimal Personnel Deployment: Efficient use of resources in virtual platforms.
Advanced Security Validation: Thorough assessment of network defenses.
Traffic Impact Analysis: Evaluates the effects on valid applications and infrastructure.

Ixia BreakingPoint finds applications across industries, prominently in network security testing and validation. Organizations utilize it to stress test their infrastructures, simulate user traffic, and validate security measures like IDS, anti-malware, anti-DDoS, and anti-ransomware capabilities. It aids in application security certification, firewall policy verification, and evaluating legacy protocols within cyber ranges, ensuring robust network and backend security measures.

Keysight Technologies

Sample Customers

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Corsa Technology

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint

November 2026

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint and other solutions. Updated: November 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,769 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Ixia BreakingPoint report.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.