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

Contrast Security Protect vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

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 Protect
Ranking in Application Security Tools
29th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
5.8
Number of Reviews
3
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
204
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2025, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Protect is 0.7%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 7.7%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode7.7%
Contrast Security Protect0.7%
Other91.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Akshay Waghmare - PeerSpot reviewer
A stable DevSecOps product that gives fewer false positives
We use the product for DevSecOps.  The product gives a few false positives. We get 99 percent true positives.  Contrast Security Protect needs to improve integration.  I have been using the product for a year.  Contrast Security Protect is stable.  The solution is scalable. My company has ten…
Kv Rao - PeerSpot reviewer
Integrates pipelines smoothly and fortifies code against vulnerabilities
I use Veracode in multiple places including static code analysis, penetration testing, and dynamic code analysis. It is part of our pipeline and integrates well with Bitbucket and Git pipelines The ease of integration with Bitbucket pipelines and Git pipelines is vital for us. Veracode allows us…

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Protect provides us with more in-depth visibility into ongoing attacks."
"The product gives a few false positives. We get 99 percent true positives."
"The solution has excellent real-time capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the SAST capability and its integration into the Veracode pipelines."
"Veracode Fix has affected our time to remediate security flaws in cases where we've been able to use it correctly because the proposals were on point, and it's been great."
"Considering that in my project, we are mostly using Software Composition Analysis as a part of Static Code Analysis, for me, the main part is reporting and highlighting necessary vulnerabilities. Veracode platform has a rather good database of different vulnerabilities in different libraries and different sources. So, finding vulnerabilities in third-party libraries is the main feature of Software Composition Analysis that we use. It is the most important feature for us."
"The most valuable feature comes from the fact that it is cloud-based, and I can scale up without having to worry about any other infrastructure needs."
"The best feature of Veracode is that we can do static and dynamic scans."
"The centralized view of different testing types helps reduce our risk exposure. The development teams have the freedom to choose their own libraries and languages. What happens is sometimes developers feel like a particular library is okay to use, then they will start using it, developing some functionality around it. However, as per our mandate, for every new repository that gets added and scanned, a report gets published. Based on that report, we decide if we can continue. In the past, we have found, by mistake, some developers have used copyleft licenses, which are a bit risky to use. We immediately replace these with more permissive, open-source licenses, so we are safe in the end."
"It is easy to use for us developers. It supports so many languages: C#, .NET Core, .NET Framework, and it even scans some of our JavaScript. You just need the extension to upload the files and the reports are generated with so much detail."
"It is a good product for creating secure software. The static code analysis is pretty good and useful."
 

Cons

"There's room for improvement in the initial setup."
"Protect's reporting GUI is very basic. To get all statuses from the APIs, we needed to write our own KPI dashboard to provide reports."
"Contrast Security Protect needs to improve integration."
"It's very expensive for a small organization."
"Veracode's SAST, DAST, and SCA are pretty good with respect to industry standards, but with regard to container security, they are in either beta or alpha testing. They need to get that particular feature up and running so that they take care of the container security part."
"Veracode doesn't really help you so much when it comes to fixing things. It is able to find our vulnerabilities but the remediation activities it does provide are not a straight out-of-the-box kind of model. We need to work on remediation and not completely rely on Veracode."
"Veracode does not support scans for .NET Blazor server applications."
"Straightforward to set up, but the configuration of the rules engine is difficult and complicated."
"When Veracode updates the pool of tests and security checks, it could be a little more transparent about what it is releasing. It's not clear what it's adding. They do thousands of checks, and when they add more, there aren't many details about what the new tests are doing."
"Veracode's ability to fix flaws is less sophisticated than that of its competitors."
"One concern is that scans take a long time to run. We scan at the end of the day because we know it will take a lot of time. We leave it to run and the report will be generated by the next day when we arrive. The scanning time could be reduced."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"For our company, the price is reasonable for the benefits that we get."
"It is very reasonably priced compared to what we were paying our previous vendor. For the same price, we are getting much more value and reducing our AppSec costs from 40 to 50 percent."
"It's very expensive, especially when you are a very small organization. If you're using Veracode at an individual level, for example, you're a developer or you run agents, the pricing might not affect you, but if you're using it at a company level to troubleshoot security issues, the pricing is not quite favorable. It may affect ROI."
"I don't have firsthand knowledge of Veracode pricing, but based on client feedback, it seems to be expensive with additional fees for certain features."
"It's worth the value"
"Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode."
"The licensing is fair, it is time-limited (e.g. one year) but there is a size cap for every app. If your applications are big (due third-party libraries, for example) you should discuss this beforehand and explore suitable agreements."
"For enterprises, Veracode has done a fairly good job, but its pricing is not suitable for startups. The microservice distributed architecture for a startup is very small. I had to do a lot of discussions on the pricing initially. I previously worked in an enterprise organization where I used Veracode, and that's how I got to know about Veracode, but that was a big organization with more than a thousand employees. So, the cost is very different for them because the size of the application is different. Its pricing makes sense there, but when we try to onboard this solution for the startup ecosystem, pricing is not friendly. Because I knew the product and I knew its value, I onboarded it, but I don't think any other startup at our scale will onboard it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
26%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
8%
Insurance Company
5%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise43
Large Enterprise112
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Contrast Security Protect?
The product gives a few false positives. We get 99 percent true positives.
What needs improvement with Contrast Security Protect?
Contrast Security Protect needs to improve integration.
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 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.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode Static Analysis?
When considering pricing, Veracode stands out due to its lower cost per service and more scalable options. It offers nearly five security testing features within its own service, making it a compet...
 

Also Known As

Contrast Protect
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

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.
Find out what your peers are saying about Contrast Security Protect vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: September 2025.
871,469 professionals have used our research since 2012.