No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

ReversingLabs vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 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

ReversingLabs
Ranking in Application Security Tools
43rd
Ranking in Container Security
48th
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
25th
Average Rating
9.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
4
Ranking in other categories
Anti-Malware Tools (44th), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (30th), Software Supply Chain Security (19th)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
2nd
Ranking in Container Security
8th
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of ReversingLabs is 0.7%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.4%, down from 9.9% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.4%
ReversingLabs0.7%
Other94.9%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

CSOInfor4e0d - PeerSpot reviewer
CSO - Information Security at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
We use the product for data enrichment or downloading malicious programs that we are otherwise unable to find
It's integrated in our product. We leverage the API, but it doesn't contribute to increasing the release time of the product itself. While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality. This could be an area where the company can generally improve. It is not a big issue for us, since we have our own development team, but it could be an issue for other companies who are less mature.
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

"As far as static analysis information is concerned, we use most of the information that is available in order to determine whether or not we might be dealing with a malware variant. This includes information that is related to Java rules. This is also related to malware families indicated or specific malicious software variants that are labeled by name."
"We have complete faith that it can do that for us, and can do it at scale."
"The automated static analysis of malware is the most valuable feature. Its detection abilities are very good. It hits all of the different platforms out there, platforms that see the items in the wild."
"It offers reports on a great many more file types than the other analysis solutions we have. It can give us a more in-depth analysis and better reporting on a larger number of file types. It also gives us a more comprehensive score on a number of things as well, and that's why we're using it as a front-end filter. It gives us more information... It's valuable because of its depth of information, as well as the breadth it gives us. There aren't a lot of tools that cover all of the different file types."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"As far as the malware repository is concerned, it's extensive. It's a good source for finding samples, where we are unable to find them on other channels or by leveraging other sources."
"We had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"As far as the availability of the content is generally concerned and the number of malicious programs that can be looked up in the repository, these are very extensive."
"We have found the static analysis to be useful in Veracode Static Analysis."
"Their dashboard is really good, overall. In my opinion, it's one of the best in the market, and I say that because we have used other service providers."
"I would recommend Veracode."
"All the features provided by Veracode are valuable, including static scan, dynamic scan, and MPT (Manual Penetration Testing)."
"Veracode supports a broad range of code technologies, and it can analyze large applications."
"When we expanded our definition of critical systems to include an internal application to be scanned by Veracode, we had initial scans that produced hundreds of vulnerabilities. We expected this, based on how the code was treated previously, but the Veracode platform allowed us to streamline our identification of these items and develop a game plan to quickly address them."
"Provides the capability to track remediation and the handling of identified vulnerabilities."
"So, it is everything that we wanted from a security point of view, and it is easy to roll out."
 

Cons

"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium."
"While the company is very helpful, it would be very much appreciated to have extensive proof of concept scripts for the different APIs available, though not for all the APIs that we have purchased. Respective scripts are available, but those scripts which are available are typically not of very high quality."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"We would really like further integration with our threat intelligence platform, which is called ThreatConnect. We would also really like further integrations with an endpoint protection product we use called Tanium. The reason I mentioned both of these is that ReversingLabs claims to have extensive integrations with both of them, but they did not work for us."
"The solution needs to improve integrations."
"I would like to see if we could do a little bit more of bulk uploading of hash sets. Right now, I can only do them individually."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"I've found that Veracode is not particularly suitable for Dynamic Application Security Testing."
"I would like to see more AI features. It's a current subject because with ChatGPT and other solutions being developed all the time, IT attacks will increase... To defend against those it's very important that the good guys use AI in ways that are good instead of bad."
"If you schedule two parallel scans under the same project, one of them will be a failure."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code." While the remediation and guidelines are there, improvement is still required, e.g., you won't get the exact guidelines, but you can get some sort of a high-level insights."
"Veracode should provide more flexibility in its pricing and licensing modules so that it could be more affordable for all types of projects and not only for very active mission-critical projects."
"It can take time to find options if you don’t use the interface a lot."
"There is much to be desired of UI and user experience. The UI is very slow. With every click, it just takes a lot of time for the pages to load. We have seen this consistently since getting this solution. The UI and UX are very disjointed."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have a yearly contract based on the number of queries and malicious programs which can be processed."
"Currently, the license number of lookups that we purchased has not been reached yet, because the integration has only recently been completed. However, our usage is expected and planned to increase over the next couple of months."
"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."
"Depending on the number of users, my company makes payments toward the solution's licensing costs."
"The cost of scanning code is cheaper. It's typically $0.50 per line of code. However, it's expensive to run a high-level process that would normally require a human security expert. For example, penetration testing costs about $1,000 per application for penetration testing. The cost of these features may be too high for smaller organizations. On the other hand, Veracode's interactive application security testing is fast and cheaper compared to other software."
"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."
"We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
"The pricing is a little on the high side but since we combine our product into one suite, it is easy to do and works well for us."
"The Veracode price model is based on application profiles, which is how you package your components for scanning."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
886,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
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 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.
 

Comparisons

 

Also Known As

ReversingLabs Titanium, ReversingLabs secure.software
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Financial services, healthcare, government, manufacturing, oil & gas, telecommunications, information technology
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 ReversingLabs vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
886,077 professionals have used our research since 2012.