Contrast Security Assess vs Veracode comparison

Contrast Security and Veracode are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. Contrast Security is ranked #30, while Veracode is ranked #2 with an average rating of 8.1. Contrast Security holds a 1.1% mindshare in AS, compared to Veracode’s 5.4% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Veracode users who would recommend it.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

1,722 Views
1,119 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Veracode

Read 208 Veracode reviews

18,744 Views
11,996 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Veracode

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Veracode and Contrast Security Assess compete in the software security platform category. Contrast Security Assess often has the upper hand due to its robust features which users find worth the cost.

Features: Veracode offers thorough vulnerability scanning, effective integration capabilities across platforms, and comprehensive coverage. Contrast Security Assess provides dynamic testing capabilities, real-time insights, and seamless integration into development pipelines, making it ideal for continuous integration environments.

Room for Improvement: Veracode could improve performance speed, offer more scanning flexibility, and address user feedback regarding its capabilities. Contrast Security Assess needs better documentation, improvements in reporting functionalities, and intuitive remediation guidance to support users effectively.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Veracode is praised for easy deployment and reliable customer service, offering a straightforward user experience. Contrast Security Assess has more complex deployment but offers proactive support that helps users even after setup, compensating for initial challenges.

Pricing and ROI: Veracode is considered cost-effective with competitive initial setup costs, providing a solid ROI with scalable options. Contrast Security Assess presents a higher initial cost but is seen as valuable due to its comprehensive feature set resulting in higher long-term value.

To learn more, read our detailed Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 881,082 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

30th

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

28th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Veracode

Ranking in Application Security Tools

2nd

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

2nd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.1%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 5.4%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Veracode	5.4%
Contrast Security Assess	1.1%
Other	93.5%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer1605099

Director of Threat and Vulnerability Management at a consultancy with 10,001+ employees

We're gathering vulnerability data from multiple environments in real time, fundamentally changing how we identify issues in applications

The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of. Assess also provides the option of helping developers incorporate security elements while they're writing code. It depends on whether individual developers decide to utilize the information that's provided to them from the solution, but it definitely gives them visibility into more environments. It gives them an opportunity to remediate vulnerabilities well before production deployments.

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

"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."

"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."

"This has changed the way that developers are looking at usage of third-party libraries, upfront. It's changing our model of development and our culture of development to ensure that there is more thought being put into the usage of third-party libraries."

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"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."

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

"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."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"You can easily integrate it with Azure DevOps. This is an added value because we work with Azure DevOps. Veracode is natively supported and we don't have to work with APIs."

"Scanning of .war and .jar is key for us."

"It gives me an idea about the most important vulnerabilities and fast remediation tips."

"The best feature of Veracode is that we can do static and dynamic scans."

"It's straightforward, and it does not require a lot of time. It's a straightforward platform that you can use for performing scans or mitigating issues. It has a very good user interface. FAQs are also helpful in case you are not familiar with it."

"I don't have to have a team of developers behind me that keep up with all the latest threats because the subscription service they provide for me does that."

"The CSCA vulnerability scanning is useful."

"Also, our customers benefited from the added security assurance of our applications, as they’ve been able to identify OWASP top-10 application vulnerabilities without a manual tester."

More Veracode pros

Cons

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

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

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

"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."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

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

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"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."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The solution could improve the Dynamic Analysis Security Testing(DAST)."

"Some important languages are not supported."

"The reporting was detailed, but there were some things that were missing. It showed us on which line an error was found, but it could have been more detailed."

"It should include more informational, low level, vulnerability summaries and groupings. Large related groups of low level vulnerabilities may amount to a design flaw or another avenue for attack."

"The scanning process could be more streamlined as it has certain limitations when performing manual scans. It has some checks when the content is in ZIP format or other formats, which takes two or three more steps than Fortify does."

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

"We would like the consolidation of all the different modules. This would help, so then we would be able to see analytics and results on one screen, like a single pane of glass."

"Veracode would benefit greatly from more training resources. The videos are great, but I would like more hands-on training writing a script, validating a script with a unit test in a different language, etc. That's something that would be very valuable."

More Veracode cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

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

"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."

"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."

"Its complexity makes it quite expensive, but it’s all worth it, with all the engineering in the background."

"The pricing is fair. You get a lot out of the product."

"The pricing is a little on the high side but since we combine our product into one suite, it is easy to do and works well for us."

"It can be expensive to do this, so I would just make sure that you're getting the proper number of licenses. Do your analysis. Make sure you know exactly what it is you need, going in."

"Aside from the standard licensing fees, we also have to pay for a competent Success Manager."

"Veracode's pricing is competitive."

"Veracode's pricing is on the higher end, but it is acceptable."

"Without getting too specific, I'd say the average yearly cost is around $50,000. The costs include licensing and maintenance support."

More Veracode pricing and cost advice

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

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

23%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

13%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	69
Midsize Enterprise	44
Large Enterprise	115

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 8% of the time

Seeker Interactive vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 3% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

SonarQube vs Veracode

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Veracode

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode

Compared 5% of the time

Coverity Static vs Veracode

Compared 4% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

More Veracode Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

January 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Veracode

January 2026

Download Veracode product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect

Overview

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

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.

Veracode

Sample Customers

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

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

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode

December 2025

Free Report: Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode

Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

881,082 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our Contrast Security Assess vs. Veracode report.

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