No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Cobalt vs Veracode comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

Cobalt
Average Rating
0.0
Number of Reviews
0
Ranking in other categories
Penetration Testing Services (7th)
Veracode
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) (3rd), Container Security (13th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (3rd)
 

Mindshare comparison

Cobalt and Veracode aren’t in the same category and serve different purposes. Cobalt is designed for Penetration Testing Services and holds a mindshare of 4.0%, up 3.3% compared to last year.
Veracode, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 4.2% mindshare, down 7.8% since last year.
Penetration Testing Services Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Cobalt4.0%
HackerOne10.0%
The NodeZero Platform by Horizon3.ai8.8%
Other77.2%
Penetration Testing Services
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.2%
SonarQube10.6%
Checkmarx One7.0%
Other78.2%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Use Cobalt?
Leave a review
YS
Software Development Engineer II at Rocket Software
Monthly scans have provided baseline security but still miss critical vulnerabilities
Veracode can improve to stand in this market. They do not have to do much; they just need to improve their UI experience and add more documentation within the application rather than just creating documentation pages on different websites. They need to ensure their web application guides whoever uses it. Since whoever uses Veracode must be a technical person, they just need to guide them to the actual points. They can also improve their security capabilities by adding more filters to identify what vulnerabilities their application has. They need to improve their scanning engine to scan for more critical defects. Also, the integration part can be enhanced by adding features to integrate with a CLI, such as introducing a CLI version or a Jenkins plugin. If such features exist, they should show it as a pop-up, signaling that they have a new feature. Currently, it feels Veracode from two years ago is still the same, so that is something Veracode needs to improve. They can improve the security part. Some of the severe security issues were never caught by Veracode in the reports. In fact, I have never seen any high or critical severity issues pop up in my Veracode report. That is one thing they can improve on their scanning ability to catch high severity issues. Next is integration; Veracode does not provide any tools to integrate with Jenkins or CLI. I do not even know if there is any CLI for Veracode that I can use to automate in my pipeline. The last thing is the UI interface that they have, as it is a bit confusing. I remember we did not have the capability to handle authentications of our internal application. We had to write Selenium code using a Selenium IDE. To write a Selenium script for a Veracode scan, you have to download a Selenium IDE, record it, and then paste that file into Veracode. I can see that Selenium IDE is already decommissioned, so it is no longer used by anyone. Still, we have to use it because Veracode only supports that kind of file for Selenium to automate. They can add more ways to authenticate our application using normal JavaScript or Python or Shell script. I feel these are the four main points. They can document it more by adding tooltips into the application that explain why a parameter is required and what other options are available. For the same example with the Selenium script, they can add a link to their documentation that explains what other kinds of scripts can be written for authentication. I feel they can also make the UI more intuitive so that whoever uses it can guide themselves, as whoever uses Veracode is already a technical person.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Penetration Testing Services solutions are best for your needs.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Outsourcing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business70
Midsize Enterprise46
Large Enterprise114
 

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...
What is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

Cobalt.io
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Hubspot, Vonage, Axel Springer, Algolia, Credit Karma, Weebly, Veeva, movingimage, Smarsh
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 Horizon3.ai, HackerOne, Bugcrowd and others in Penetration Testing Services. Updated: September 2026.
915,325 professionals have used our research since 2012.