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 (55th)
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 4.6% mindshare, down 10.3% since last year.
Vulnerability Management Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Fortra Tripwire IP3600.6%
Wiz6.4%
Tenable Nessus5.0%
Other88.0%
Vulnerability Management
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.6%
SonarQube16.3%
Checkmarx One9.9%
Other69.2%
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."
"We could manage our entire IP range with the 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."
"The platform itself has a lot of AppSec best practices information, especially in the mitigation recommendation process."
"The main feature that I have found valuable is the solution's ability to find issues in static analysis. Additionally, there are plenty of useful tools."
"It changes the DevSecOps process because we find flaws much earlier in the development life cycle, and we also spot third-party software that we don't allow on developers' machines."
"The most valuable feature is the security and vulnerability parts of the solution. It shows medium to high vulnerabilities so we can find them, then upgrade our model before it is too late. It is useful because it automates security. Also, it makes things more efficient. So, there is no need for the security team to scan every time. The application team can update it whenever possible in development."
"It is scalable and quick to deploy into the site and the pipelines. The reports and analytics are good, and the false positive rate is low. It gives true results."
"The dashboards and the threat insights it provides are very good. The dashboards are intuitive and pretty straightforward, but also pretty detailed."
"We use Veracode static analysis during development to eliminate vulnerability issues"
"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."
 

Cons

"I am not very impressed by the technical support."
"We need to dedicate time and resources to keep it running."
"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 pricing for qualified startups such as Neo4j could be improved."
"The scans were sometimes not accurate in version 2022. There were some false positives in the vulnerability reports. We used to get false positives, and we were responsible for checking all of the alerts and determining whether they were true positives or false positives. They might have already improved it. If they have not, they can look into how to mitigate false positives."
"Veracode can be improved with more integrations, more automations, enhanced API features, and more advanced analytics."
"The static scans on Java lack microservices architecture scanning. We have developed an in-house pattern for this and the scans can't take care of it as a single entity."
"Veracode can be slow at times and has room for improvement, which may cause delays in our products and prolonged static scans."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
"The cost of the solution is a little bit expensive. Expensive in the sense that there was a hundred percent increase in cost from last year to this year, which is certainly not justified."
"Veracode isn't important to the organization's shift-left security strategy itself. It's a tool."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I believe the price compares well within the market."
"The product was expensive for us."
"I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others."
"Veracode is affordable for large organizations, but its pricing may be out of reach for small and medium companies."
"Its complexity makes it quite expensive, but it’s all worth it, with all the engineering in the background."
"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."
"If I compare the pricing with other software tools, then it is quite competitive. Whatever the price is, they have always given us a good discount."
"To my knowledge, licensing for Veracode Static Analysis is paid yearly by my company."
"The pricing of the product depends upon the number of codes or the number of applications."
"There is a fee to scale up the solution which I consider expensive."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Vulnerability Management solutions are best for your needs.
884,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
14%
Retailer
8%
Energy/Utilities Company
8%
Computer Software Company
6%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
12%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise45
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 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: February 2026.
884,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.