Contrast Security Assess vs Polyspace Code Prover comparison

Why PeerSpot?

Contrast Security and MathWorks are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Contrast Security is ranked #23 with an average rating of 7.8, while MathWorks is ranked #31 with an average rating of 4.0. Contrast Security holds a 1.8% mindshare in AS, compared to MathWorks’s 1.3% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 85% of MathWorks users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 15 Contrast Security Assess reviews

5,680 Views
4,146 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Polyspace Code Prover

Read 7 Polyspace Code Prover reviews

3,982 Views
3,305 Comparison Views

85% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Polyspace Code Prover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Contrast Security Assess and Polyspace Code Prover are advanced security tools competing in the software protection arena. Based on user reviews, Contrast Security Assess is favored for its pricing and support, while Polyspace Code Prover is notable for its comprehensive features, making it worth the investment.

Features: Contrast Security Assess offers real-time protection, intuitive setup, and seamless integration into DevOps processes. Polyspace Code Prover stands out with sophisticated static analysis capabilities, robust vulnerability identification, and thorough security coverage.

Room for Improvement: Contrast Security Assess users suggest enhanced reporting functionalities, better scalability, and improved user feedback implementation. For Polyspace Code Prover, users request a more user-friendly experience, better documentation, and accessibility improvements.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Deploying Contrast Security Assess is straightforward, with reliable customer service support. Polyspace Code Prover has a more complex deployment process, and its customer assistance receives mixed feedback.

Pricing and ROI: Contrast Security Assess offers competitive pricing with satisfactory ROI, appealing to budget-conscious organizations. Polyspace Code Prover, despite higher setup costs, delivers substantial ROI by enhancing code quality and security, validating its higher cost with improved long-term benefits.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover Report (Updated: November 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover

November 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 920,929 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 Application Security Tools

23rd

Average Rating

8.4

Reviews Sentiment

6.8

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (22nd)

Polyspace Code Prover

Ranking in Application Security Tools

31st

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

2.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.8%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.3%, down from 1.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Contrast Security Assess	1.8%
Polyspace Code Prover	1.3%
Other	96.9%

Application Security Tools

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

reviewer2760282

General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification

Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

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

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"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."

"Overall, the product is strong and improving, support is responsive and effective, and supported integrations work for many customers."

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

"It has helped us to improve the overall security posture of the company, we are able to address the findings before they have been reported by a third-party, and it has also helped us to gain our customers' trust."

"When we access the application, it continuously monitors and detects vulnerabilities."

"Contrast was a very complete solution; it met all of our technical requirements and it was really the only IAST product that felt like a real product."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

"The outputs are very reliable."

"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."

"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."

"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

Cons

"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."

"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."

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

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

"Personalization of the board and how to make it appealing to an organization is something that could be done on their end. The reports could be adaptable to the customer's preferences."

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

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"Automation could be a challenge."

"The tool has some stability issues."

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."

"I'm still trying to use constraints with range propagation, but I can't get it to work properly, and I haven't found any documentation."

"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."

"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."

"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."

"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."

"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."

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

"We use the paid version."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

920,929 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

Manufacturing Company

36%

Comms Service Provider

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Computer Software 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
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

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

What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for Polyspace Code Prover?

It is validation for Functional Safety applications in automotive.

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Polyspace Code Prover?

We are actually trying to consolidate everything into one solution. To reduce, that might also be a new solution, but we're not currently actively looking for that. It's just that we'd prefer to fi...

See all answers

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

SonarQube vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 14% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 10% of the time

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 8% of the time

CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 7% of the time

Cequence Security vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 6% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

November 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Polyspace Code Prover

October 2026

Download Polyspace Code Prover 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

Polyspace Code Prover boosts code reliability by identifying critical issues like memory corruption and null pointer dereferences, adhering to ISO 26262 standards.

Polyspace Code Prover offers advanced static code analysis tailored to detect complex runtime issues, making it a substantial asset in safety-critical software development. With features that facilitate easy integration with minimal tool switching, it effectively examines code segment runtimes for potential faults such as memory overflows. Polyspace Code Prover stands out by providing mathematical proofs of correctness, differentiating it from other static tools. However, improvements in processing speed and large-scale application handling remain necessary. While integration challenges exist with CI environments like AWS and Azure, the tool's efficiency is valued in automotive applications for unit-level verification and requirement-based component development, despite some scalability limitations.

What are Polyspace Code Prover's key features?

Division by Zero Checks: Ensures code stability and reliability by identifying risky operations.
Memory Corruption Detection: Safeguards against potential memory leaks and access violations.
ISO 26262 Compliance: Aligns with critical automotive industry standards.
Mathematical Correctness Proof: Provides certainty in logic correctness, unique in static analysis tools.
Minimal Tool Switching: Enhances user efficiency with seamless integration into workflows.

What benefits can be gained from Polyspace Code Prover?

Enhanced Code Reliability: Reduces faults and improves the robustness of developed code.
Increased Efficiency: Fast analysis with minimal tool changes streamlines workflow.
Compliance Assurance: Supports meeting stringent industry standards.
Risk Reduction: Identifies critical issues early, minimizing potential downtime or defects.

In industries such as automotive, Polyspace Code Prover is crucial for Functional Safety validation. It is applied in diverse projects like vertical control systems and cluster infotainment, with a focus on requirement-based component development. Despite challenges in larger applications, it remains a vital tool for analyzing Simulink models and small-scale implementations.

MathWorks

Sample Customers

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

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover

November 2026

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover

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

DOWNLOAD NOW

920,929 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.

See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.

We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.