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

Software Risk Manager ASPM vs Veracode comparison

Sponsored
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 21, 2025

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
5.5
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (28th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (13th), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (18th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (13th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (12th), Software Supply Chain Security (8th), Cloud Infrastructure Entitlement Management (CIEM) (7th), Cloud Detection and Response (CDR) (5th)
Software Risk Manager ASPM
Ranking in Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)
14th
Average Rating
0.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (29th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (21st)
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

reviewer1980216 - PeerSpot reviewer
Business Development Manager For Palo Alto Networks at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Unified security platform has simplified multi-cloud protection and improved threat response
From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market. Additionally, there is not a clear MSP model compared to other vendors such as CrowdStrike. These are significant limitations, especially today when managed services are becoming increasingly important for end users. Palo Alto decided to limit some functionalities because they want to stress more on Cortex XSIAM. I do not agree with this strategy because Cortex XSIAM is a completely different market compared to Cortex XDR. This is the main issue of Cortex—the commercial model Palo Alto is implementing. The product is very good; the problem is the commercial model. There are probably some areas for improvement because Palo Alto is growing too much. Today the challenge is to have skilled people, which I believe is the same issue everywhere. I do not agree with this decision.
Saravanan_Radhakrishnan - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies
Facilitates continuous assessment of applications, covering both static and dynamic security aspects
Code Dx lacks one aspect, the dynamic security part, known as DAST. It's not an on-premise solution; it's in the cloud now. There are compliance standards and data standards where the customer might need to have the data on-premises for dynamic security testing. So that is one shortfall. An area of improvement could be developing an on-premise DAST solution. The current one is a complete cloud-based solution, and that can be one of the areas of improvement.
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 AI and automation features in detecting and responding to high-risk threats are impressive; it's one of the best tools regarding AI technology and unifies security in one platform in real-time, improving vulnerability analysis, incident response, and compliance reporting."
"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."
"From a technical standpoint or pricing, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a stronger solution in the market at the moment compared to other products from ConnectWise or Symantec."
"I have absolutely seen improvements in our incident close rates, with mean time to detect and respond reduced significantly, sometimes by at least forty to fifty percent."
"Overall, Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is a technically strong product, and I rate it ten out of ten."
"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."
"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 customers were looking for something around static security and dynamic security, and in all those areas, they were looking for an industry leader with a proven solution. Synopsys is a Gartner leader, so I position this particular technology for the technical pre-sales part of it."
"The user interface is excellent, the code review process is quick and provides great analytics to understand our code better, and the SAST scan is high-speed."
"They also have what's called a Software Composition Analysis that can point out errors and fixes for third-party software frameworks, which is very nice."
"We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle."
"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."
"The best features in Veracode include static analysis and the early detection of vulnerable libraries; it integrates with tools such as Jenkins."
"I appreciate Veracode's SAST and SCA features, which help to find open-source vulnerabilities. I'd estimate it's about 98% accurate, though some false positives occasionally exist. Our team has been using it for a long time."
"Veracode has improved my organization's ability to fix flaws because before Veracode, we did not even know about issues from the security side."
"Veracode provides visibility into application status at every phase of development through static analysis."
 

Cons

"Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks is creating some confusion in terms of names because this is recent."
"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."
"The pricing is high, making ROI challenging to justify, especially during transitions between solutions."
"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."
"Some aspects of the GUI can be confusing and make it difficult for me to find certain options or navigate where needed."
"From the commercial perspective, we have some limitations because Palo Alto has a minimum number of users of endpoints set at 200, which is quite high for the Italian market."
"The initial setup is a bit challenging because things are not easy. It needs a lot of technology adaptability plus the customer's environment-specific use cases."
"The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report."
"I am expecting some AI-related features in it. Also, if someone is using AI-generated code, Veracode should be able to detect that."
"While Veracode is way ahead of its competitors on Gartner Magic Quadrant, it's a bit more expensive than Fortify. It's a good solution for the cost, but if we had a high budget, we would go with Checkmarx, which is much better than Veracode."
"I would like to see these features: entering comments for internal tracking; entering a priority; reports that show the above."
"Scanning large amounts of code can be a time-consuming process and there is scope for improvement."
"The dynamic scanning feature works, but it doesn't work properly for some of our applications. It doesn't allow us to skip. They claim that we can do this, but it doesn't work when we're scanning the applications in real-time."
"They could improve how they fix vulnerabilities. They could have more support in place to help the developers."
"The scanning process for records could be faster and there is room for improvement in Veracode's performance."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"It is more of an enterprise solution for budget-conscious customers. So, it's moderately priced. It's not for everybody."
"Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode."
"It's too expensive for the European market. That is why, in a big bank with 400 applications, we are able to use it only for 10 of them. But the other solutions are also expensive, so it wasn't a differentiator."
"Aside from the standard licensing fees, we also have to pay for a competent Success Manager."
"Veracode's price is reasonable."
"Its complexity makes it quite expensive, but it’s all worth it, with all the engineering in the background."
"We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
"I think it's a great value. It's at a price point that a small company like mine can afford to use versus, if it was too exorbitant, I wouldn't be able to use this product. The cost of the license is small in comparison to the value it brings"
"The cost of scanning code is cheaper. It's typically $0.50 per line of code. However, it's expensive to run a high-level process that would normally require a human security expert. For example, penetration testing costs about $1,000 per application for penetration testing. The cost of these features may be too high for smaller organizations. On the other hand, Veracode's interactive application security testing is fast and cheaper compared to other software."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Performing Arts
10%
Financial Services Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
8%
University
8%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise2
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

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?
Regarding areas for improvement, the tool performs its functions well, but frequent name changes across Palo Alto Net...
What is your primary use case for Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks?
Cortex Cloud by Palo Alto Networks serves as our primary tool for understanding our assets and performing API integra...
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. 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
Code Dx
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
Discover why companies like: CGI said, "Synopsys and Software Risk Manager have provided the results we’re looking for".
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 SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: February 2026.
881,707 professionals have used our research since 2012.