FOSSA vs Veracode comparison

FOSSA and Veracode are both solutions in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category. FOSSA is ranked #9 with an average rating of 8.0, while Veracode is ranked #3 with an average rating of 8.1. FOSSA holds a 3.1% mindshare in SCA, compared to Veracode’s 7.0% mindshare. Additionally, 92% of FOSSA users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 89% of Veracode users who would recommend it.

FOSSA

Read 15 FOSSA reviews

1,643 Views
1,577 Comparison Views

92% willing to recommend

Veracode

Read 208 Veracode reviews

18,744 Views
4,124 Comparison Views

89% willing to recommend

FOSSA

Veracode

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 2024

Veracode and FOSSA both compete in the software security category, providing solutions for different user needs. Veracode has an advantage in comprehensive security solutions, while FOSSA shines in open-source license compliance and dependency management.

Features: Veracode offers static, dynamic, and software composition analysis across multiple languages, providing vulnerability management tools for developers. Its integration into the software development lifecycle enhances security. FOSSA specializes in seamless integration with development environments, focusing on license compliance and policy management. It supports diverse build environments for efficient open-source management.

Room for Improvement: Veracode users are concerned about stability, speed, and false positives, needing better application integration and improved reporting. FOSSA users seek better security scanning for vulnerabilities across components and more detailed reporting.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Veracode supports deployment across public, private, and hybrid clouds, with responsive but sometimes slow customer service. FOSSA offers easy deployment on public and on-premises environments, with reliable and efficient customer service.

Pricing and ROI: Veracode's pricing is high but justified by its extensive security features, with potential long-term savings from reduced incidents. FOSSA offers competitive pricing with flexible options, providing significant value in developer time saved and legal compliance, catering to different organizational needs and budgets.

To learn more, read our detailed FOSSA vs. Veracode Report (Updated: December 2025).

Buyer's Guide

FOSSA vs. Veracode

December 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 879,853 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

FOSSA

Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

9th

Average Rating

8.6

Reviews Sentiment

7.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Veracode

Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

3rd

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), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category, the mindshare of FOSSA is 3.1%, down from 3.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 7.0%, down from 10.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Market Share Distribution
Product	Market Share (%)
Veracode	7.0%
FOSSA	3.1%
Other	89.9%

Software Composition Analysis (SCA)

Featured Reviews

reviewer2588340

Senior Software Engineer at a manufacturing company with 10,001+ employees

Dependency management enhanced with update suggestions but lacks precise vulnerability tracking

FOSSA does not show the exact line of code with vulnerabilities, which adds time to the process as we have to locate these manually. Some other tools like Check Point or SonarQube provide exact line numbers for bugs. Also, the process in FOSSA can be quite contradicting and not very straightforward for new users.

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

"FOSSA is easy to use and set up, provides relatively accurate results, and doesn't require armies of people to get value from its use."

"I found FOSSA's out-of-the-box policy engine to be accurate and that it was tuned appropriately to the settings that we were looking for. The policy engine is pretty straightforward... I find it to be very straightforward to make small modifications to, but it's very rare that we have to make modifications to it. It's easy to use. It's a four-category system that handles most cases pretty well."

"FOSSA provided us with contextualized, easily actionable intelligence that alerted us to compliance issues. I could tell FOSSA exactly what I cared about and they would tell me when something was out of policy. I don't want to hear from the compliance tool unless I have an issue that I need to deal with. That was what was great about FOSSA is that it was basically "Here's my policy and only send me an alert if there's something without a policy." I thought that it was really good at doing that."

"The most valuable feature is definitely the ease and speed of integrating into build pipelines, like a Jenkins pipeline or something along those lines. The ease of a new development team coming on board and integrating FOSSA with a new project, or even an existing project, can be done so quickly that it's invaluable and it's easy to ask the developers to use a tool like this. Those developers greatly value the very quick feedback they get on any licensing or security vulnerability issues."

"FOSSA allows us to keep track of all dependencies to ensure they are up to date and not causing any vulnerabilities."

"The support team has just been amazing, and it helps us to have a great support team from FOSSA. They are there to triage and answer all our questions which come up by using their product."

"The most valuable feature is its ability to identify all of the components in a build, and then surface the licenses that are associated with it, allowing us to make a decision as to whether or not we allow a team to use the components. That eliminates the risk that comes with running consumer software that contains open source components."

"FOSSA suggests solutions for dependency mismatches."

More FOSSA pros

"The dynamic scanning tool is what I like the best. Compared to other tools that I've used for dynamic scanning, it's much faster and easier to use."

"It scans for the OWASP top-10 security flaws at the dynamic level and, at the static level, it scans for all the warnings so that developers can fix the code before we go to UAT or the next phase."

"I have found the user interface extremely helpful in prioritizing issues."

"The static scan is the most valuable feature."

"Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools."

"Veracode offers various security features."

"The source composition analysis component is great because it gives our developers some comfort in using new libraries."

"The most valuable feature is the dynamic application security testing."

More Veracode pros

Cons

"I wish there was a way that you could have a more global rollout of it, instead of having to do it in each repository individually. It's possible, that's something that is offered now, or maybe if you were using the CI Jenkins, you'd be able to do that. But with Travis, there wasn't an easy way to do that. At least not that I could find. That was probably the biggest issue."

"I would like the FOSSA API to be broader. I would like not to have to interact with the GUI at all, to do the work that I want to do. I would like them to do API-first development, rather than a focus on the GUI."

"If you have thousands of applications, organizing them all into teams or tags is challenging."

"On the legal and policy sides, there is some room for improvement. I know that our legal team has raised complaints about having to approve the same dependency multiple times, as opposed to having them it across the entire organization."

"I would like more customized categories because our company is so big. This is doable for them. They are still in the stages of trying to figure this out since we are one of their biggest companies that they support."

"On the dashboard, there should be an option to increase the column width so that we can see the complete name of the GitHub repository. Currently, on the dashboard, we see the list of projects, but to see the complete name, you have to hover your mouse over an item, which is annoying."

"Security scanning is an area for improvement. At this point, our experience is that we're only scanning for license information in components, and we're not scanning for security vulnerability information. We don't have access to that data. We use other tools for that. It would be an improvement for us to use one tool instead of two, so that we just have to go through one process instead of two."

"We have seen some inaccuracies or incompleteness with the distribution acknowledgments for an application, so there's certainly some room for improvement there. Another big feature that's missing that should be introduced is snippet matching, meaning, not just matching an entire component, but matching a snippet of code that had been for another project and put in different files that one of our developers may have created."

More FOSSA cons

"The feature that allows me to read which mitigation answer was submitted, and to approve it, requires me to use do so in different screens. That makes it a little bit more complicated because I have to read and then I have to go back and make sure it falls under the same number ID number. That part is a little bit complicated from my perspective, because that's what I use the most."

"Static scanning takes a long time, so you need to patiently wait for the scan to achieve. I also think the software could be more accurate. It isn't 100 percent, so you shouldn't completely rely on Veracode. You need to manually verify its findings."

"The current version of the application does not support testing for API."

"The only areas that I'm concerned with are some of the newer code libraries, things that we're starting to see people dabble with. They move quickly enough to get them into the Analysis Engine, so I wouldn't even say it is a complaint. It is probably the only thing I worry about: Occasionally hitting something that is built in some other obscure development model, where we either can't scan it or can't scan it very well."

"A nice addition would be if it could be extended for scenarios with custom cleansers."

"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."

"There is also a size limit of 100 MB so we cannot upload files that are larger than that. That could be improved. Also, the duration of the scan is a bit too long."

"I do expect large applications with millions of lines of code to take a while, but it would be nice if there was a possibility to be able to have a baseline initial scan. I know that Veracode touts that there are Pipeline Scans that are supposed to take 90 seconds or less, and we've tried to do that ourselves with our ERP application. However, it actually times out after two hours of scanning. If the static scan itself or another option to run a lower tier scan can be integrated earlier on into our SDLC, it would be great. Right now, it takes so long that we usually leave it till a bit later in the cycle, whereas if it ran faster, we could push it to the time when a developer will be checking in code. That would make us feel a lot more confident that we'd be able to catch things almost instantaneously."

More Veracode cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution's cost is a five out of ten."

"Its price is reasonable as compared to the market. It is competitively priced in comparison to other similar solutions on the market. It is also quite affordable in terms of the value that it delivers as compared to its alternative of hiring a team."

"FOSSA is a fairly priced product. It is not either cheaper or expensive. The pricing lies somewhere in the middle. The solution is worth the money that we are spending to use it."

"FOSSA is not cheap, but their offering is top-notch. It is very much a "you get what you pay for" scenario. Regardless of the price, I highly recommend FOSSA."

"The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free."

"The pricing is really fair compared to a lot of other tools on the market."

"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."

"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."

"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."

"I found Veracode very expensive, though I'm not the person paying for it. I was surprised to find out how much the subscription costs and that the executive board approved it, but it was a no-brainer because now my company has better security scans."

"Veracode is fairly priced."

"The Veracode price model is based on application profiles, which is how you package your components for scanning."

"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."

More Veracode pricing and cost advice

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Manufacturing Company

21%

Financial Services Firm

10%

Computer Software Company

Educational Organization

Financial Services Firm

17%

Computer Software Company

14%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	5
Midsize Enterprise	1
Large Enterprise	8

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	70
Midsize Enterprise	44
Large Enterprise	114

Questions from the Community

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for FOSSA?

The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free. You have to pay for the features you need, which I think is fair. If you want to get value for free...

See all answers

What needs improvement with FOSSA?

See all answers

What is your primary use case for FOSSA?

I have worked with FOSSA primarily to manage the dependencies in our projects. For example, if I take a Spring Boot application, FOSSA helps in identifying mismatches or unsupported dependencies th...

See all answers

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...

See all answers

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.

See all answers

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.

See all answers

Comparisons

Black Duck SCA vs FOSSA

Compared 25% of the time

Snyk vs FOSSA

Compared 22% of the time

Mend.io vs FOSSA

Compared 10% of the time

JFrog Xray vs FOSSA

Compared 9% of the time

Sonatype Lifecycle vs FOSSA

Compared 6% of the time

More FOSSA Competitors

SonarQube vs Veracode

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Veracode

Compared 8% of the time

GitHub Advanced Security vs Veracode

Compared 5% of the time

OWASP Zap vs Veracode

Compared 4% of the time

Coverity Static vs Veracode

Compared 4% of the time

More Veracode Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

FOSSA

January 2026

Download FOSSA product report

Buyer's Guide

Veracode

December 2025

Download Veracode product report

Also Known As

No data available

Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect

Overview

Up to 90% of any piece of software is from open source, creating countless dependencies and areas of risk to manage. FOSSA is the most reliable automated policy engine for legal teams to maintain license compliance, security to fix vulnerabilities, and engineering to improve code quality across the entire software supply chain. As the only developer-native open source management platform, FOSSA fully integrates with your existing CI/CD pipeline to provide complete visibility and context earlier in the software development lifecycle. For the first time, teams can collaboratively shift left and audit, analyze, control, and remediate license issues and vulnerabilities right in their existing workflows.

FOSSA

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.

Veracode

Sample Customers

AppDyanmic, Uber, Twitter, Zendesk, Confluent

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

Buyer's Guide

FOSSA vs. Veracode

December 2025

Free Report: FOSSA vs. Veracode

Find out what your peers are saying about FOSSA vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: December 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

879,853 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our FOSSA vs. Veracode report.

See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.

We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.