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

Fortra Tripwire IP360 vs Veracode comparison

 

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

Fortra Tripwire IP360
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
4.3
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (52nd)
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) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

While both are Security Software solutions, they serve different purposes. Fortra Tripwire IP360 is designed for Vulnerability Management and holds a mindshare of 0.6%, up 0.3% compared to last year.
Veracode, on the other hand, focuses on Application Security Tools, holds 4.9% mindshare, down 10.4% since last year.
Vulnerability Management Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Fortra Tripwire IP3600.6%
Wiz6.6%
Tenable Nessus5.1%
Other87.7%
Vulnerability Management
Application Security Tools Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode4.9%
SonarQube16.9%
Checkmarx One9.9%
Other68.30000000000001%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

Corey Cole - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Coordinator - Technology Security at a government with 10,001+ employees
The solution helps users to manage their entire IP range, but it's unreliable and very expensive to maintain
Only the administrator was using the product. He used it to read reports as part of our compliance programs. It wasn't heavily used by a lot of users. The tool comes in at a large scale, and we tried to scale it down. The scaling did not apply to us. It was neither difficult nor easy. I rate the scalability a five out of ten. We had some challenges while scaling it down. It could do 10,000 devices, and we wanted to use it for ten devices. The process was difficult and expensive. We did not need the product anymore.
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

"Tripwire IP360 is a very stable solution."
"It's become the pinnacle point for anything that enters the network or anything that's passing through to production to first be affected by IP360, hardened, and up to standard. For our integrity management, one was deployed in the bank about two years ago and that's still going to expand the usage and the product itself. That will go hand in hand with training and expanding the product as for where it's deployed."
"We could manage our entire IP range with the solution."
"What I found most valuable in Veracode is that it gives me a part-by-part report of the entire EAR file and lets me set up the application for a limited time. Once that expires, Veracode allows you to automatically renew it, which is one of the features I find remarkable in Veracode."
"It's not "one policy fits all." I really like that Veracode allows me to set up specific policies that I can apply to applications."
"We use it to get our scan results and see where our software is vulnerable or not vulnerable."
"Because it is a SaaS offering, I do not have to support the infrastructure."
"Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools."
"One thing we like is the secret detection feature. It has helped us to discover keys stored in our settings file as a TXT document. We can address that vulnerability by using encryption. We can even scan Docker images for vulnerabilities. Static analysis is another good feature of Veracode because we can run a security scan during development to identify the vulnerabilities."
"It scans for the OWASP top-10 security flaws at the dynamic level and, at the static level, it scans for all the warnings so that developers can fix the code before we go to UAT or the next phase."
"It's straightforward, and it does not require a lot of time. It's a straightforward platform that you can use for performing scans or mitigating issues. It has a very good user interface. FAQs are also helpful in case you are not familiar with it."
 

Cons

"We need to dedicate time and resources to keep it running."
"I am not very impressed by the technical support."
"The reporting functions can use improvement. There is room for growth because reporting functions differ a lot depending on what you're going to output. It depends on whether it's for technical or senior management and how it's interpreted. There could be growth within the reporting functionality side."
"The support team could be more responsive, and the dependency of users on the support team is too high and should be reduced."
"Veracode Static Analysis can improve the false positive. There are always improvements that can be done to the false positive rate. There are some things that get flagged that are not an issue. However, it is not a huge concern."
"There were some additional manual steps or work involved that we should not have needed to do."
"The scanning is a little slow, but other than that it's fine. It's usually when the binaries get up into the multi-hundred megabyte size."
"The triage indicator was kind of hard to find. It's a very small arrow and I had no idea it was there."
"The scanning could be a little faster. The process around three or four minutes, but it would help if it could be further reduced."
"Veracode has plenty of data. The problem is the information on the dashboards of Veracode, as the user interface is not great. It's not immediately usable. Most of the time, the best way to use it is to just create issues and put them in JIRA... But if I were a startup, and only had products with a good user interface, I wouldn't use Veracode because the UI is very dated."
"The JIRA integration automation aspect of it could be improved significantly. We want to have a way to create tickets that are going to allow people to work through those flaws that we're finding. We don't want people to feel like they're missing out on something or that they're not following directions in the right way."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe the price compares well within the market."
"The product was expensive for us."
"I know that Veracode is a semi-pricey solution. If you are serious about security, I would recommend that you use an open-source option to learn how the scanning process works and then look into Veracode if you want to really step up your game and have an all-in-one solution."
"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 has been a barrier to wider use here. I think my team is the only one at the university. Other folks might like to use it, but it's pretty pricey. You could see what else is in the market, but I hear that's the price for most solutions. You might not find a better deal in the market, or it might be an incomplete solution. I mean, for the level of interaction we get with Veracode staff, it's been pretty good."
"Veracode is expensive. Some of its products are expensive. I don't think it's way more expensive than its competitors. The dynamic is definitely worth it, as I think it's cheaper than the competitors. The static scan is a little bit more expensive, around 20 percent more expensive. The manual pen test is more expensive, but it is an expensive service because it's a manual pen test and we also do retests. I don't think it is way more expensive than the competitors, but it's about 15 to 20 percent more expensive."
"The worst part about the product is that it does not scale at all. Also, microservices apps will cost you a fortune."
"I wouldn't really recommend Veracode for a small firm, because it might be a little pricey for them. But for a large organization, with more than 1,000 applications in the enterprise, there are tiered levels of pricing."
"Compared to other similar products, the licensing and pricing are definitely competitive. If you see Checkmarx as the market leader, then we are talking about Veracode being a fraction of the cost. You also have to consider your hidden costs: you need a team to maintain it, a server, and resources. From that point of view, Veracode is great because the cost is really a fraction of many competitors."
"It can be expensive to do this, so I would just make sure that you're getting the proper number of licenses. Do your analysis. Make sure you know exactly what it is you need, going in."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
882,180 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
16%
Retailer
8%
Government
6%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

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

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 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?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Veracode is that it is fairly moderate.
 

Also Known As

IP360
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

1. Aetna 2. Accenture 3. Adidas 4. AIG 5. Airbus 6. Akamai 7. Amazon 8. American Express 9. Aon 10. Apple 11. ATT 12. Autodesk 13. Bank of America 14. Barclays 15. Bayer 16. Bechtel 17. BlackRock 18. Boeing 19. BNP Paribas 20. Cisco 21. CocaCola 22. Comcast 23. Dell 24. Deutsche Bank 25. eBay 26. ExxonMobil 27. FedEx 28. Ford 29. General Electric 30. Google 31. HP 32. IBM
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 Wiz, Tenable, Qualys and others in Vulnerability Management. Updated: January 2026.
882,180 professionals have used our research since 2012.