Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) vs Contrast Security Assess comparison

The compared Black Duck and Contrast Security solutions aren't in the same category. Black Duck is ranked #9 in DAST , and holds a 4.8% mindshare in the category. Contrast Security is ranked #27 in SAST , and holds a 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 50% of Black Duck users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 100% of Contrast Security users who would recommend it.

Continuous Dynamic (formerl...

Read 2 Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) reviews

906 Views
390 Comparison Views

50% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

2,206 Views
1,147 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Continuous Dynamic (formerl...

Contrast Security Assess

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) and Contrast Security Assess based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST).

To learn more, read our detailed Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Report (Updated: March 2026).

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,376 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

Continuous Dynamic (formerl...

Average Rating

8.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (9th)

Contrast Security Assess

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (27th)

Mindshare comparison

While both are Quality Assurance solutions, they serve different purposes. Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) is designed for Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) and holds a mindshare of 4.8%, up 2.3% compared to last year.
Contrast Security Assess, on the other hand, focuses on Static Application Security Testing (SAST), holds 1.0% mindshare, up 0.4% since last year.

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)	4.8%
Veracode	17.2%
Checkmarx One	16.4%
Other	61.6%

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Contrast Security Assess	1.0%
SonarQube	17.7%
Checkmarx One	10.4%
Other	70.9%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

it_user245412

Executive Vice President, Operations at a computer software company with 51-200 employees

The product and customer service is extremely efficient but I would like to see more research and code examples.

* The continuous online scanning capabilities and reporting features. * The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy. * The ability to review security items quickly along with being able to retest vulnerabilities on our schedule make the Sentinel product an invaluable tool for our company’s product security requirements.

Read full review

ToddMcAlister

Lead Application and Data Security Engineer at a insurance company with 5,001-10,000 employees

It has an excellent API interface to pull APIs.

Assess has brought our development time down because it helps create code the first time. Instead of going through the Jenkins process to build an application, they can see right off the bat that if there are errors in the code and fix them before it even goes to build.

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

"The SaaS product features accessible from a browser make managing our online systems easy."

"The solution is very accurate in identifying vulnerabilities. In cases where we are performing application assessment using Contrast Assess, and also using legacy application security testing tools, Contrast successfully identifies the same vulnerabilities that the other tools have identified but it also identifies significantly more. In addition, it has visibility into application components that other testing methodologies are unaware of."

"The accuracy of the solution in identifying vulnerabilities is better than any other product we've used, far and away. In our internal comparisons among different tools, Contrast consistently finds more impactful vulnerabilities, and also identifies vulnerabilities that are nearly guaranteed to be there, meaning that the chance of false positives is very low."

"The most valuable feature is the continuous monitoring aspect: the fact that we don't have to wait for scans to complete for the tool to identify vulnerabilities. They're automatically identified through developers' business-as-usual processes."

"By far, the thing that was able to provide value was the immediate response while testing ahead of release, in real-time."

"It is a stable solution...Contrast Security Assess is one of the first players in this market, so they have experience and customers, especially abroad. Overall, it's a good product."

"Contrast was a very complete solution; it met all of our technical requirements and it was really the only IAST product that felt like a real product."

"Overall, the product is strong and improving, support is responsive and effective, and supported integrations work for many customers."

"It has helped us to improve the overall security posture of the company, we are able to address the findings before they have been reported by a third-party, and it has also helped us to gain our customers' trust."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

Cons

"I would like to see more research and code examples for the vulnerabilities identified to better assist us with our remediation process."

"The product's retesting part needs improvement. The tool also needs improvement in the suggestions provided for fixing vulnerabilities. It relies more on documentation rather than on quick fixes."

"The solution should provide more details in the section where it shows that third-party libraries have CVEs or some vulnerabilities."

"Contrast Security Assess covers a wide range of applications like .NET Framework, Java, PSP, Node.js, etc. But there are some like Ubuntu and the .NET Core which are not covered."

"The out-of-the-box reporting could be improved. We need to write our own APIs to make the reporting more robust."

"Regarding the solution's OSS feature, the one drawback that we do have is that it does not have client-side support. We'll be missing identification of libraries like jQuery or JavaScript, and such, that are client-side."

"I would like to see them come up with more scanning rules."

"I think there was activity underway to support the centralized configuration control. There are ways to do it, but I think they were productizing more of that."

"To instrument an agent, it has to be running on a type of application technology that the agent recognizes and understands. It's excellent when it works. If we're using an application that is using an unsupported technology, then we can't instrument it at all. We do use PHP and Contrast presently doesn't support that, although it's on their roadmap. My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available

"For what it offers, it's a very reasonable cost. The way that it is priced is extremely straightforward. It works on the number of applications that you use, and you license a server. It is something that is extremely fair, because it doesn't take into consideration the number of requests, etc. It is only priced based on the number of onboarded applications. It suits our model as well, because we have huge traffic. Our number of applications is not that large, so the pricing works great for us."

"I like the per-application licensing model... We just license the app and we look at different vulnerabilities on that app and we remediate within the app. It's simpler."

"The good news is that the agent itself comes in two different forms: the unlicensed form and the licensed form. Unlicensed gives use of that software composition analysis for free. Thereafter, if you apply a license to that same agent, that's when the instrumentation takes hold. So one of my suggestions is to do what we're doing: Deploy the agent to as many applications as possible, with just the SCA feature turned on with no license applied, and then you can be more choosy and pick which teams will get the license applied."

"It's a tiered licensing model. The more you buy, as you cross certain quantity thresholds, the pricing changes. If you have a smaller environment, your licensing costs are going to be different than a larger environment... The licensing is primarily per application. An application can be as many agents as you need. If you've got 10 development servers and 20 production servers and 50 QA servers, all of those agents can be reporting as a single application that utilizes one license."

"You only get one license for an application. Ours are very big, monolithic applications with millions of lines of code. We were able to apply one license to one monolithic application, which is great. We are happy with the licensing. Pricing-wise, they are industry-standard, which is fine."

"The product's pricing is low. I would rate it a two out of ten."

"The solution is expensive."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

16%

Healthcare Company

13%

Computer Software Company

12%

Government

Financial Services Firm

18%

Manufacturing Company

11%

Computer Software Company

Comms Service Provider

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

No data available

By reviewers
Company Size	Count
Small Business	2
Midsize Enterprise	3
Large Enterprise	6

Comparisons

OpenText Dynamic Application Security Testing vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)

Compared 12% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)

Compared 7% of the time

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)

Compared 7% of the time

Fortify Application Defender vs Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic)

Compared 6% of the time

More Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) Competitors

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

FortiDevSec vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

SonarQube vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

OpenText Core Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 4% of the time

More Contrast Security Assess Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

March 2026

Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) report

Download Continuous Dynamic (formerly WhiteHat Dynamic) product report

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

March 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Also Known As

Sentinel Dynamic, WhiteHat Security Application Security Testing, Synopsys WhiteHat Dynamic

Contrast Assess

Overview

Continuous Dynamic^™ is a powerful dynamic application security testing (DAST) solution that rapidly and accurately finds vulnerabilities in websites and applications. With this DAST solution, you can perform scans and testing at the scale and speed modern enterprises need to identify security risks across your entire application portfolio.

Black Duck

Contrast Security is the world’s leading provider of security technology that enables software applications to protect themselves against cyberattacks, heralding the new era of self-protecting software. Contrast's patented deep security instrumentation is the breakthrough technology that enables highly accurate assessment and always-on protection of an entire application portfolio, without disruptive scanning or expensive security experts. Only Contrast has sensors that work actively inside applications to uncover vulnerabilities, prevent data breaches, and secure the entire enterprise from development, to operations, to production.

Contrast Security

Sample Customers

Information Not Available

Williams-Sonoma, Autodesk, HUAWEI, Chromeriver, RingCentral, Demandware.

Buyer's Guide

Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)

March 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about Veracode, Checkmarx, OpenText and others in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST). Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,376 professionals have used our research since 2012.

We monitor all Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) 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.