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

Rapid7 InsightAppSec 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

Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
6th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.5
Number of Reviews
19
Ranking in other categories
AI Observability (9th)
Veracode
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), 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 January 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Rapid7 InsightAppSec is 6.0%, up from 3.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 19.4%, down from 31.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode19.4%
Rapid7 InsightAppSec6.0%
Other74.6%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Shritam Bhowmick - PeerSpot reviewer
Vulnerability Management Lead at garrett
Provides reliable applications security but needs better integration options
There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not sufficient in Rapid7 InsightAppSec. The user interface sometimes has glitches, which may prevent appropriate results during navigation, and even when we get appropriate results, it can be impossible to export them to CSV records or download files. Regarding scalability, Rapid7 InsightAppSec is not a scalable solution for our industry due to limited integration capabilities. Rapid7 relies on another tool called InsightConnect, which requires additional investment, detracting from scalability. Another area that needs improvement is the integration of AI capabilities into the platform. Both Rapid7 InsightAppSec and InsightVM need to advance in that area. In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives. This necessitates improvement in their behavioral-based analytics feature.
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

"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."
"You have various attack modules, and you also have the Attack Replay feature for the attack sequence. You can reproduce an attack and see it. That is a very good feature I noticed in this solution. It helps developers as well."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec helps us in both regulatory compliance and in strengthening our security posture."
"I rate stability ten out of ten."
"The initial setup for us was easy enough. We didn't face too many issues. Deployment took maybe 30 minutes. It's quite quick and doesn't cause too much trouble at the outset."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the graphical interface."
"The reporting functionality is excellent."
"When considering DAST, it is not attributed to a singular feature but rather the capabilities of the engine that provides a genuine penetration testing experience and delivers insightful reports."
"I like the way the flaws are reported in the system."
"The ease of integration with Bitbucket pipelines and Git pipelines is vital for us."
"Veracode's most valuable aspect is continuous integration. It helps us integrate with other applications so that it can monitor the security process."
"My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous."
"In my experience, Veracode is one of the most powerful tools available in the market from a security perspective. It is a market leader in source code analysis."
"Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools."
"The pricing is worth it."
"The automation of Veracode is great because we no longer have to run manual testing."
 

Cons

"I required a solution to manage on-premises, but I was not as satisfied as expected."
"There is room for improvement in the response time of customer service and support levels."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement in detecting phishing pages."
"The only concern I have with Rapid7 is that it does not provide enough information about vulnerabilities within AppSec."
"Currently, InsightAppSec lacks similar functionality. Customers must wait for remediation during the developers' preparation of a new version."
"I would like more details of what the product can do."
"In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives."
"There is room for improvement in Rapid7 InsightAppSec by giving clients the ability for extra columns on reports and enabling the extraction of remediation reports into a CSV format. Currently, the PDF format is cumbersome to go through when dealing with thousands of pages."
"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."
"Its cost and the long scanning times for large applications are the areas for improvement."
"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."
"The solution could improve the Dynamic Analysis Security Testing(DAST)."
"Security can always be improved."
"Its cost and the long scanning times for large applications are the areas for improvement."
"It does not have a reporting structure for an OS-based vulnerability report, whereas its peers such as Fortify and Checkmarx have this ability. Checkmarx also provides a better visibility of the code flow."
"From the usability perspective, it is not up to date with the latest trends. It looks very old. Tools such as Datadog, New Relic, or infrastructure security tools, such as AWS Cloud, seem very user-friendly. They are completely web-based, and you can navigate through them pretty quickly, whereas Veracode is very rigid. It is like an old-school enterprise application. It does the job, but they need to invest a little more on the usability front."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"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."
"The pricing is a bit high."
"When I looked at the pricing, it was definitely a value. In terms of the service and what it's checking, the cost was very reasonable, particularly because we could have multiple code bases as part of a project."
"For the value we get out of it, coupled with the live defect review sessions, we find it an effective value for the money. We are a larger organization."
"Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription."
"There is a fee to scale up the solution which I consider expensive."
"The Veracode price model is based on application profiles, which is how you package your components for scanning."
"The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
880,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
14%
Manufacturing Company
13%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business11
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
In Rapid7 InsightAppSec, a distinctive feature is the provision of a CDM for integrating web servers and web applications. To establish the connection between these applications, you only need to p...
What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Our main use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec is to perform internal assessment of applications and external facing applications. We have a cloud engine plus on-premises engine, and we have been lever...
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

InsightAppSec
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace
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 Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.
880,954 professionals have used our research since 2012.