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

CAST Highlight vs Oligo comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

CAST Highlight
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
13th
Average Rating
7.8
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Oligo
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
21st
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (44th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2024, in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category, the mindshare of CAST Highlight is 1.0%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Oligo is 1.0%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
 

Featured Reviews

AS
Oct 20, 2022
Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights
We get some code insights from CAST. We get insights as to if this or that function has way too many comments or things like that. We would like to backtrace, and understand how dependent that is as per the application. For example, when you are writing code in C Sharp versus writing code in C++, obviously, C++ has more complexities within that. What CAST does is CAST aggregates for different languages, and if they could provide us inputs for each of these languages separately, then that'd be great. When they classify code between their own code and third-party code, they classify it based on the number of files, and not really the number of lines. I'm not sure how extensive of a change this is on their end; however, it would be nice if they could tell us the number of lines of code that are not theirs. There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset. We have come across bugs occasionally. Technical support could be better.

Quotes from Members

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

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"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."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
Information not available
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
800,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
21%
Computer Software Company
17%
Insurance Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
10%
No data available
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CAST Highlight?
The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CAST Highlight?
CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing an eight or nine out of ten.
What needs improvement with CAST Highlight?
The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight.
Ask a question
Earn 20 points
 

Comparisons

 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

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
Information Not Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Synopsys, Veracode, Snyk and others in Software Composition Analysis (SCA). Updated: August 2024.
800,688 professionals have used our research since 2012.