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

CAST Highlight vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Nov 5, 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

CAST Highlight
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
16th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
7
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veracode
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
3rd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
201
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (2nd), Container Security (8th), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category, the mindshare of CAST Highlight is 1.0%, up from 0.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 9.5%, down from 10.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
 

Featured Reviews

Jayanti Rode - PeerSpot reviewer
Identifies migration blockers and boosters while facing challenges with platform-specific roadblocks
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Windows-specific blockers or Linux-specific blockers, as I often work with only one platform at a time. If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time. Understanding only the OS-specific blockers means I would avoid resolving irrelevant issues, thus saving time. Initially, I receive a response from support, however, if there is involvement from R&D or other teams, it may take longer than expected. The support team is challenging when sharing source code. As this is a static code analysis tool, it sometimes requires source code for R&D. However, CAST clients may be restricted from sharing due to business logic and nondisclosure agreements. This creates a challenge, and I may have to share pseudo code or seek client approval, risking escalation.
David-Robertson - PeerSpot reviewer
Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful, but the usability needs improvement
Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful. My colleagues and I don't need to be experts on all of those ancillary things, so we can focus more on the business deliverables. They have a pretty good tool that allows me to run scans of my local integrated development environment. I can find a lot of those flaws a lot sooner than I would if I had to wait for these cloud-based scans. They've come out with some sort of automated fix feature. I haven't used it, but they gave us a demo of it, and that one looks promising. I don't know if it's ready for prime time yet.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It offers good performance."
"CAST Highlight provides a clear overview of the role portfolio and allows users to assess the overall quality of the environment. Users can see where improvements are needed and follow up on trends of the application."
"The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."
"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"In cloud migration, I use CAST highlight to identify blockers, which are the negative road patterns, and also the boosters, which are positive code patterns."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization."
"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."
"It can be very hard to make a good lab environment with a console with log windows and code bases. What I like about Veracode is that they managed to do that. It has a very responsive graphical user interface and has worked very well. I was very pleased with that."
"It has provided what we were looking for in such an application, meaning static application security testing functionality. That was what we were interested in."
"The developers' awareness of the security weaknesses within their code has improved. They aren't just mitigating these issues, they are realizing these are, in fact, issues that have to be dealt with."
"The reporting being highly accurate is pretty cool. I use another product and I was always looking for answers as to what line, which part of the code, was wrong, and what to do about it. Veracode seems to have a solid database to look things up and a website to look things up."
"Veracode Security Labs are fantastic. My team loves getting the hands-on experience of putting in a flaw and fixing it. It's interactive. We've gotten decent support from the sales and software engineers, so the initial support was excellent. They scheduled a consultation call to dive deep and discuss why we see these findings and codes. That was incredibly helpful."
"The tech support has been very much on the forefront of contacting customers. They help us by making sure all the processes have been outlined and are being followed. They regularly look with us at the whole platform process."
"It has improved the quality of code being delivered for test and its vulnerability resolutions timeline has improved."
 

Cons

"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"If I received categorization in containerization blockers, it would save time."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"There could be potential improvements or additional features added to CAST Highlight to make it better."
"The false positive rates were quite high in our case."
"They should improve on the static scanning time."
"Their scanning engine is sometimes a little bit slow. They can improve the scan time."
"It needs better APIs, reporting that I can easily query through the APIs and, preferably, a license model that I can predict."
"The scans were sometimes not accurate in version 2022. There were some false positives in the vulnerability reports. We used to get false positives, and we were responsible for checking all of the alerts and determining whether they were true positives or false positives. They might have already improved it. If they have not, they can look into how to mitigate false positives."
"The UI is not user-friendly and can be improved."
"I'd like to see an improved component of it work in a DevOps world, where the scanning speed does not impede progress along the AppSec pipeline."
"I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution."
"Basic support is included with the standard licensing feed but it can be upgraded for an additional cost."
"CAST Highlight is an expensive solution. However, CAST Highlight is less expensive than the CAST AIP, but it remains too expensive and the professional services from CAST are also too expensive. The high price is part of the problem with the CAST solutions."
"It is a pretty costly tool. A lot of customers are resistant to using it."
"Negotiate some, but their prices are reasonable."
"We pay based on the number of developers working on a particular project."
"The pricing is fair. You get a lot out of the product."
"I have not examined Veracode's pricing in detail, but from an industry perspective, I see that there is a tendency toward Veracode, which suggests competitive pricing."
"Veracode is one of the more expensive solutions in the market, but it is worth the expense because of the eLearning and the security consultations; everything is included in the license."
"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."
"Veracode's pricing is competitive."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
24%
Computer Software Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Insurance Company
7%
Computer Software Company
17%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Insurance Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about CAST Highlight?
The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for CAST Highlight?
The pricing of CAST Highlight was not considered expensive or cheap, and no specific comment was made about the setup cost.
What needs improvement with CAST Highlight?
The solution provides agnostic blockers for platforms as well as for containerization. Within that containerization, it offers generic blockers. However, my project might require it to provide Wind...
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?
The SAST and DAST modules are great.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veracode?
The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions. However, the tool provides good vulnerability and database features. It is worth the money.
 

Also Known As

No data available
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Wells Fargo, Bank of NY Mellon, Northern Trust, Microsoft, Amazon, IBM, BMW, AT&T, US Army, US Air Force, US Navy, John Hancock, Marsh & McLennan, Ernst & Young, PwC, Volkswagen, Boston Consulting Group, London Stock Exchange, Telefonica, Saur France, Total Energies France, SNCF
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 CAST Highlight vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
856,873 professionals have used our research since 2012.