CodeSonar vs Contrast Security Assess comparison

CodeSecure and Contrast Security are both solutions in the Application Security Tools category. CodeSecure is ranked #34, while Contrast Security is ranked #24 with an average rating of 8.0. CodeSecure holds a 1.1% mindshare in AS, compared to Contrast Security’s 1.7% mindshare. Additionally, 87% of CodeSecure users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Contrast Security users who would recommend it.

CodeSonar

Read 7 CodeSonar reviews

3,449 Views
2,380 Comparison Views

87% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Read 12 Contrast Security Assess reviews

3,818 Views
2,749 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

CodeSonar

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Contrast Security Assess and CodeSonar compete in the security scanning software category. CodeSonar has an advantage due to comprehensive security scanning and extensive code coverage, while Contrast Security Assess is noted for user-friendliness and integration capabilities.

Features: Contrast Security Assess is recognized for seamless application protection, real-time vulnerability detection, and direct integration with development tools. CodeSonar provides robust static analysis, concurrent flaw detection, and extensive code coverage with built-in checks.

Room for Improvement: Contrast Security Assess could benefit from enhanced reporting features, broader language compatibility, and improved scalability options. CodeSonar needs better integration support, enhancements in scalability, and increased speed in static analysis processing.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Both offer straightforward deployment. Contrast Security Assess is praised for efficient onboarding, while CodeSonar is highlighted for comprehensive support and responsive customer service. Contrast Security Assess, though easy to start with, may lack the depth of support that CodeSonar users value.

Pricing and ROI: Contrast Security Assess is seen as an economical option with lower setup costs and faster ROI, attracting smaller teams. CodeSonar, despite higher initial costs, justifies its price with superior capabilities and long-term gains, making it a preferred choice for those seeking advanced security measures.

To learn more, read our detailed CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess Report (Updated: June 2026).

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess

June 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 903,118 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

CodeSonar

Ranking in Application Security Tools

34th

Average Rating

8.2

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Code Analysis (10th)

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Application Security Tools

24th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.1

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (23rd)

Mindshare comparison

As of July 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of CodeSonar is 1.1%, down from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.7%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Contrast Security Assess	1.7%
CodeSonar	1.1%
Other	97.2%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

Mathieu ALBRESPY

Intigration Developer at ez-Wheel

Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand

This is the first time I've used this kind of software. It was the only one we could apply to analyze with MISRA rules. At my new company, I tried to use Klocwork. I tried to use it, just once so I cannot compare it exactly with CodeSonar. I also have a plugin for my Visual Studio and I try to make it work. It's not easy, however, I don't think that we have this kind of functionality with CodeSonar. It can do some incremental analysis. However, since this feature is also available on CodeSonar, it would be a good idea to have a plugin on Visual Studio just to have a quick analysis.

Read full review

Eucharia Okafor

DevSecOps Engineer at a tech vendor with 1,001-5,000 employees

Continuous in-app security has transformed our development workflow and has reduced manual checks

Contrast Security Assess changes how the team thinks about security. Instead of us waiting for a security audit at the end of any sprint, vulnerabilities surface as developers are writing and testing code. That shift is significant because fixing a bug in development costs more than fixing it later. It captures everything right there and remediates it because it catches vulnerability and remediates immediately while the application is running. It improves our collaboration between development and security teams, as developers get clear actionable findings immediately. We get continuous visibility into our application risk posture. Ultimately, it helps us to shift fast and save money, which is usually a trade-off, but Contrast Security Assess makes both possible. The feature that stands out most to me in Contrast Security Assess is the ability to capture vulnerability while the application is running. Another standout feature is the real-time detection that finds vulnerabilities as code runs. It has fewer false positives and works continuously in the application; you install it and it is there. It captures issues during development quickly and is easily integrated with a CI/CD pipeline, especially if you are using GitLab or GitHub. The real-time detection feature of Contrast Security Assess helps us very well compared to traditional SAST tools. Traditional tools scan from the outside and guess where problems might be. Contrast Security Assess works from the inside because it is embedded into the application. The agent lives inside the running application, allowing it to see exactly what is happening in real-time. This means we are getting accurate alerts instead of a long list of potential issues that require manual investigation. When it comes to the CI/CD pipeline, Contrast Security Assess really shines for our daily work, as it plugs directly into tools like Jenkins, GitHub, or Azure DevOps. When a developer commits code and triggers a build, Contrast Security Assess is already testing it in the background. If there is any vulnerability, the pipeline automatically flags or stops the application before bad code reaches production. This means security becomes everyone's responsibility, not just the security team's, and it gives us real-time, accurate security that fits into how our team already works.

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

"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."

"I would suggest trying out automated tools along with CodeSonar on your project, and you will find out that CodeSonar reports many more defects compared to other static analysis tools, so this is a very important tool."

"It has helped us a lot with some issues and has helped us avoid bad code."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."

"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."

"What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times."

"It has been able to scale."

"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."

More CodeSonar 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."

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

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"Assess has an excellent API interface to pull APIs."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

Cons

"It was difficult for us to apply a rule, especially to a part of the code, and not apply it to the rest of the code."

"The MISRA guidelines were not appropriately reported and there were some flags or errors."

"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."

"It was expensive."

"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."

"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."

"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."

"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."

More CodeSonar cons

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"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."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The application’s pricing is high compared to other tools."

"Our organization purchased a license to use the solution."

"Pricing is a bit costly."

"The solution's price depends on the number of licenses needed and the source code for the project."

"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."

"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."

"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 solution is expensive."

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

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

903,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

24%

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

University

Financial Services Firm

16%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Construction Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	2

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	7

Questions from the Community

Ask a question

Earn 20 points

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Contrast Security Assess?

Regarding pricing, setup cost, and licensing, the annual licensing for Contrast Security Assess costs about $20,000 to $100,000 per year, and per application, it costs about $5,000 to $15,000 per y...

See all answers

What needs improvement with Contrast Security Assess?

Contrast Security Assess could improve in the reporting and the dashboard experience. While the data is there, pulling together an executive-level summary requires too much manual work. I would lov...

See all answers

What advice do you have for others considering Contrast Security Assess?

The biggest production gain from Contrast Security Assess is the reduced costs and overhead within my company. Security feedback comes to developers instantly with Contrast Security Assess, reducin...

See all answers

Comparisons

SonarQube vs CodeSonar

Compared 14% of the time

Coverity Static vs CodeSonar

Compared 11% of the time

Polyspace Code Prover vs CodeSonar

Compared 8% of the time

Veracode vs CodeSonar

Compared 7% of the time

More CodeSonar Competitors

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 7% of the time

SonarQube 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

HCL AppScan vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Tools

June 2026

Download CodeSonar product report

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

July 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Also Known As

No data available

Contrast Assess

Overview

CodeSonar offers a potent tool for static code analysis, adept in detecting runtime errors and security vulnerabilities, with a fast deployment process and scalable capabilities. Its quick analysis and efficient web interface provide a strong basis for code quality validation.

CodeSonar specializes in identifying runtime errors, dead code, and security threats while providing features like code surfing and browsing. It offers a highly efficient web interface, though users find initial setup complex and highlight the need for better static analysis, broader language support beyond C and C++, and an improved licensing model. Despite these challenges, its integration with Jenkins and technical guidance support makes it a reliable choice for teams in defense and software quality assessment. Deployment is quick and easy, yet initial costs are a common concern among users.

What are the key features of CodeSonar?

Quick Analysis: Delivers fast runtime error detection and reporting.
GUI Interface: Offers a user-friendly experience for code browsing.
Scalability: Efficiently deploys across various environments.
Security and Code Detection: Identifies vulnerabilities and potential bugs.
Effective Configuration: Simplified log and analysis configuration.

What benefits can be seen in user reviews?

Detection of Code Vulnerabilities: Enhances security with robust threat detection.
Process Integration: Seamlessly integrates with DevOps tools such as Jenkins.
Scalable Deployment: Quickly adaptable in expanding environments.
GUI Usability: Highly efficient for technical teams to navigate.

CodeSonar is primarily implemented in industries like defense and companies prioritizing code quality. Teams utilize its static code analysis and threat detection capabilities, integrating with Jenkins for continuous integration workflows. Security checks post-builds and technical support are common, aiding in effective defect management.

CodeSecure

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

Sample Customers

Viveris, Micrel Medical Devices, Olympus, SOFTEQ, SONY

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

Buyer's Guide

CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess

June 2026

Free Report: CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess

Find out what your peers are saying about CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess and other solutions. Updated: June 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

903,118 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our CodeSonar vs. Contrast Security Assess 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.