Polyspace Code Prover vs Veracode comparison

Read 208 Veracode reviews

19,227 Views
11,536 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

Polyspace Code Prover

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Oct 8, 2024

Veracode and Polyspace Code Prover compete in code security and analysis. Veracode often has the edge due to its seamless integration and ease of use.

Features: Veracode provides a comprehensive SaaS platform, facilitating seamless integration into CI/CD pipelines. It offers versatile usage across different environments and ensures ease of use. Polyspace Code Prover is equipped with precise formal verification tools, emphasizing detailed formal static analysis. Its capabilities are most beneficial to safety-critical systems where rigorous code verification is necessary.

Room for Improvement: Veracode could improve its in-depth code analysis, expand features for more comprehensive code reviews, and enhance reporting capabilities. Polyspace Code Prover can work on smoother integration with other development tools, simplifying setup processes, and refining user interface for ease of use.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Veracode offers high scores in cloud-based deployment, enabling rapid integration supported by responsive customer service. Polyspace requires more thorough initial configuration and effort in setting up, focused on comprehensive reviews with an emphasis on on-premise installations.

Pricing and ROI: Veracode is considered cost-effective with strong ROI, suitable for fast-paced development environments. It has appealing pricing for teams requiring quick and scalable solutions. Polyspace is more costly, justifying the investment with projects that demand rigorous code verification and where verification precision is paramount.

To learn more, read our detailed Polyspace Code Prover vs. Veracode Report (Updated: March 2026).

Polyspace Code Prover vs. Veracode

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 884,371 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

Polyspace Code Prover

Ranking in Application Security Tools

26th

Average Rating

7.2

Reviews Sentiment

2.3

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Veracode

Ranking in Application Security Tools

3rd

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

208

Ranking in other categories

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

As of March 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Polyspace Code Prover is 1.3%, up from 1.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.6%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Veracode	4.6%
Polyspace Code Prover	1.3%
Other	94.1%

Application Security Tools

Featured Reviews

reviewer2760282

General Manager at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Has struggled with performance and integration but supports critical safety verification

Execution speed of the tests and generally the integration into AWS-driven CI work chains or workflows represent how it can be improved in my opinion. Performance issues plus license costs are two main driving factors. The CI environments that we use employ up to around 40,000 virtual CPUs per day in peak, running at the same time. We always have problems distributing licenses accordingly with other products. I can talk to the experts doing the integration, but as far as I know, I was involved with Polyspace Code Prover and we had a lot of difficulties integrating it into our Bazel-driven CI toolchain, plus integrating it on the AWS environments in Linux that we use. It was much more straightforward using Code Sonar there. The reason is the execution speed, integration with Azure and stuff, and pricing. The CI integration and maybe a better-suited license model for CI-driven execution are other areas I recommend improving. That's something we discussed with all of the software companies whose products we use, such as compilers. We have a lot of parallel builds, and each call to a license server is actually problematic in the long run.

Read full review

reviewer2703864

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.

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

"Efficiency and speed are the advantages I see in Code Sonar over Polyspace Code Prover."

"The product detects memory corruptions."

"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."

"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."

"The outputs are very reliable."

"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."

"The analysis of the vulnerabilities and the results are the most valuable features."

"It gives feedback to developers on the effectiveness of their secure coding practices."

"The capability to identify vulnerable code is the most valuable feature of Veracode."

"For our rapid, secure DevOps cycle, we have integration of the Vericode API into our build tool, and Greenlight into our IDE."

"Within SCA, there is an extremely valuable feature called vulnerable methods. It is able to determine within a vulnerable library which methods are vulnerable. That is very valuable, because in the vast majority of cases where a library is vulnerable, none of the vulnerable methods are actually used by the code. So, if we want to prioritize the way open source libraries are updated when a library is found vulnerable, then we want to prioritize the libraries which have vulnerable methods used within the code."

"The most valuable features of the solution are its extensive reporting capabilities and user-friendly interface."

"The most valuable feature is the seamless automation of Veracode via the pipeline, in comparison to other solutions like Fortify SSC, which are complex to integrate through the pipeline."

"The ability on static scans to be able to do sandbox scans which do not generate metrics."

More Veracode pros

Cons

"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."

"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."

"Automation could be a challenge."

"Because we had difficulties in efficiently integrating Polyspace Code Prover into our CI toolchain, these tests are mostly run manually and only occasionally."

"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."

"The tool has some stability issues."

"It can have more APIs and capabilities to handle other things well. We were doing a trial for it. There were two things that I looked at: one was uploading some Java-related content and the other was uploading database SQL files and having the review done on the quarterback. The Java portion of it worked fine, and it was pretty seamless, but the database portion was not. We uploaded some files to use for vulnerabilities, and the tell-all portion of it was pretty easy. We uploaded a war file and Java files, and we got the reports back on these. They were pretty clear to understand. We did the same thing for the database portion for the most part. However, the content wasn't getting uploaded in a predictable fashion, and it was slow and hard to get done. We had to do it over and over. After it indicated that the content was uploaded, there were no results. There were zero search findings. It was possibly a user error, something that we didn't do correctly, but they had acknowledged that it was something they were currently enhancing. This is something that could be made easier if they haven't already done that. I don't know how many releases they've had in that timeframe. I haven't looked at it since then. It was a trial period."

"It is not as fast as Snyk."

"I would also like to see some improvement in the speed. That is really the only complaint, but in all reality we have a massive Java application that needs to be scanned. Our developers are saying, "It takes 72 hours to scan it." That is probably the nature of the beast, and I'm actually pretty accepting of that time frame, but since it's a complaint that I get, faster is always better. I don't necessarily think that the speed is bad as it is, just that faster would be better."

"The on-platform reporting needs to be opened up much more. We'd like to be able to look at the inspection data from a trending perspective in a much more open manner. I need to be able to sort and filter much more flexibly than I can today."

"I have contacted the technical support and customer support. With Veracode's technical support, for some issues, it has been really difficult for them to understand the problem, and they ask us to do some tests we've already told them we completed in the first ticket."

"The training lab is not very user-friendly and takes a long time to set up."

"The sandbox could use some improvement; when creating a sandbox, it requires us to put the application name in twice, which seems unnecessary."

"It's taking too much time to do a quality scan."

More Veracode cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We use the paid version."

"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 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."

"Licensing is pretty flexible. It's a little bit weird, it's by the size of the binary, which is a strange way to license a product. So far they've been pretty flexible about it."

"We're very comfortable with their model. We think they're a good value. We worked very closely with Veracode on understanding their license model, understanding what comprises the fee and what does not. With their assistance in design, we decomposed our application in a way where we are scanning a very significant amount of code without wasting their capacity and generating redundant reported issues. You scan in profiles, per se. And we work with them, in their offices, to design the most effective approach. So the advice I would have for customers is, you can get up and live fast, but work closely with Veracode to refine the method you use for scanning and the way you compile the applications. There's a concept called entry-point scanning, and that's probably not used well by the rest of their customers. We see our licensing as a good value because we leverage it heavily."

"Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode."

"The price of Veracode Static Analysis could improve."

"Veracode provides value for the cost, with no additional charges apart from the standard licensing fee."

"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."

More Veracode pricing and cost advice

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

884,371 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

37%

Computer Software Company

Aerospace/Defense Firm

Healthcare Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

Computer Software Company

12%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	6

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	69
Midsize Enterprise	45
Large Enterprise	114

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Polyspace Code Prover?

What is your primary use case for Polyspace Code Prover?

It is validation for Functional Safety applications in automotive.

What advice do you have for others considering Polyspace Code Prover?

We are actually trying to consolidate everything into one solution. To reduce, that might also be a new solution, but we're not currently actively looking for that. It's just that we'd prefer to fi...

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.

Coverity Static vs Polyspace Code Prover

Comparisons

Compared 19% of the time

SonarQube vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 15% of the time

Klocwork vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 11% of the time

CodeSonar vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 8% of the time

Mend.io vs Polyspace Code Prover

Compared 4% of the time

More Polyspace Code Prover Competitors

SonarQube vs Veracode

Compared 10% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Veracode

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode

Compared 4% of the time

Coverity Static vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Veracode

Compared 3% of the time

More Veracode Competitors

Product Reports

Download Polyspace Code Prover product report

Polyspace Code Prover

February 2026

Download Veracode product report

February 2026

Also Known As

No data available

Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect

Overview

Polyspace Code Prover is a sound static analysis tool that proves the absence of overflow, divide-by-zero, out-of-bounds array access, and certain other run-time errors in C and C++ source code. It produces results without requiring program execution, code instrumentation, or test cases. Polyspace Code Prover uses semantic analysis and abstract interpretation based on formal methods to verify software interprocedural, control, and data flow behavior. You can use it on handwritten code, generated code, or a combination of the two. Each operation is color-coded to indicate whether it is free of run-time errors, proven to fail, unreachable, or unproven.

MathWorks

Veracode is a leading provider of application security solutions, offering tools to identify, mitigate, and prevent vulnerabilities across the software development lifecycle. Its cloud-based platform integrates security into DevOps workflows, helping organizations ensure that their code remains secure and compliant with industry standards.

Veracode supports multiple application security testing types, including static analysis (SAST), dynamic analysis (DAST), software composition analysis (SCA), and manual penetration testing. These tools are designed to help developers detect vulnerabilities early in development while maintaining speed in deployment. Veracode also emphasizes scalability, offering features for enterprises that manage a large number of applications across different teams. Its robust reporting and analytics capabilities allow organizations to continuously monitor their security posture and track progress toward remediation.

What are the key features of Veracode?

Static Analysis (SAST) - Scans source code for vulnerabilities before deployment.
Dynamic Analysis (DAST) - Examines applications in a running state to detect flaws in real-time.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) - Identifies risks in open-source libraries and third-party components.
Manual Penetration Testing - Offers expert analysis for more complex vulnerabilities.
Integrations with DevOps tools - Seamlessly integrates with CI/CD pipelines for automated security checks.

What benefits should users consider in Veracode reviews?

Early detection of vulnerabilities - Helps developers fix security issues early in the development process.
Scalability - Supports organizations with large-scale application portfolios.
Compliance support - Ensures applications meet various security standards and regulations.
Developer training - Provides tools for educating developers on secure coding practices.
Comprehensive reporting - Offers detailed reports that track remediation and risk trends.

Veracode is widely adopted in industries like finance, healthcare, and government, where compliance and security are critical. It helps these organizations maintain strict security standards while enabling rapid development through its integration with Agile and DevOps methodologies.

Veracode helps businesses secure their applications efficiently, ensuring they can deliver safe and compliant software at scale.

Sample Customers

Alenia Aermacchi, CSEE Transport, Delphi Diesel Systems, EADS, Institute for Radiological Protection and Nuclear Safety, Korean Air, KOSTAL, Miracor, NASA Ames Research Center

Manhattan Associates, Azalea Health, Sabre, QAD, Floor & Decor, Prophecy International, SchoolCNXT, Keap, Rekner, Cox Automotive, Automation Anywhere, State of Missouri and others.