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
42nd
Ranking in Container Security
49th
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 (42nd), Threat Intelligence Platforms (TIP) (30th), Software Supply Chain Security (18th)
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
3rd
Ranking in Container Security
10th
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of ReversingLabs is 0.8%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.4%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.4%
ReversingLabs0.8%
Other94.8%
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

"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."
"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."
"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 had nothing in the environment to do such analysis, so it's been a savior in many ways."
"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."
"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."
"ReversingLabs has a large sample size."
"The integration of static testing with our Azure DevOps CI pipeline was easy."
"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 has an easy-to-use interface."
"The static scan and the detailed reports, which include issue information and permissions, are the most valuable features."
"The most important feature is the static scanning analysis, and the reason is that it can tell us vulnerability in that code, right before we go ahead and push something to production or provide something to a client... Dynamic scanning actually hits our Web applications, to try to detect any well known Web application vulnerabilities as well."
"Ensures our code and system are 100% compliant."
"All the top vulnerabilities are detected, which makes sure all our applications are up-to-date on market threats, and it gives a good workaround process for the developers to secure their code and ensure all our applications are secure."
"Static, dynamic, and manual scan features were all very useful for us and helped us fix many security flaws."
 

Cons

"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The product support could be better at times. Sometimes, the resources that they provide could be of higher quality."
"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."
"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."
"I think the biggest room for improvement is around known or accepted vulnerabilities that, when we re-scan, we want those things to be recognized as already accepted, as an exception."
"We have not had much free expert support from the vendor. We have had to have a team of highly skilled individuals to make the solution work."
"It's pretty efficient, but sometimes the static analysis is prone to a lot of false positives."
"However, it would be great if Veracode automatically packaged stuff up for you."
"They should improve on the static scanning time."
"There is much to be desired of UI and user experience. The UI is very slow, and with every click, it takes a lot of time for the pages to load, and we have seen this consistently since getting this solution."
"Sometimes, I get feedback from a developer saying, "They are scanning a Python code, but getting feedback around Java code.""
"The current version of the application does not support testing for API."
 

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."
"The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions."
"There is a fee to scale up the solution which I consider expensive."
"Veracode provides value for the cost, with no additional charges apart from the standard licensing fee."
"Veracode is expensive. But the solution is worth it."
"The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."
"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."
"I don't have firsthand knowledge of Veracode pricing, but based on client feedback, it seems to be expensive with additional fees for certain features."
"As compared to others, it is a costly solution. It is overpriced, and many organizations with a limited budget cannot afford it. That is why they are going for other tools, but those tools are not that effective. Veracode is better in terms of quality. If you want good service, you have to pay for it."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Computer Software Company
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
5%
 

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.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.