Contrast Security Assess vs Software Risk Manager ASPM comparison

Contrast Security and Black Duck are both solutions in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category. Contrast Security is ranked #27, while Black Duck is ranked #29. Contrast Security holds a 1.0% mindshare in SAST, compared to Black Duck’s 1.0% mindshare. Additionally, 100% of Contrast Security users are willing to recommend the solution.

Contrast Security Assess

Read 11 Contrast Security Assess reviews

2,206 Views
1,147 Comparison Views

100% willing to recommend

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Read 1 Software Risk Manager ASPM review

1,390 Views
1,001 Comparison Views

0% willing to recommend

Contrast Security Assess

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Mar 22, 2026

Contrast Security Assess and Software Risk Manager ASPM are competing products in the field of application security posture management. Contrast Security Assess has an edge in features with real-time vulnerability identification, while Software Risk Manager ASPM is preferred for its analytics and comprehensive reporting capabilities.

Features: Contrast Security Assess offers real-time vulnerability detection, seamless integration with development tools, and continuous monitoring with actionable insights. Software Risk Manager ASPM provides detailed risk assessments, comprehensive security dashboards, and advanced analytics for strategic planning.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Contrast Security Assess is easily deployed via a lightweight agent model and offers responsive customer support. Software Risk Manager ASPM provides flexible deployment options with potentially complex setup and robust customer service that includes in-depth assistance and training.

Pricing and ROI: Contrast Security Assess typically has competitive setup costs and transparent pricing, offering a strong ROI through faster vulnerability remediation. Software Risk Manager ASPM might have higher upfront costs, but its rich features deliver substantial long-term ROI with enhanced security measures and detailed reporting.

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

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 2026

Download the complete report

Helped 885,444 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

Contrast Security Assess

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

27th

Average Rating

8.8

Reviews Sentiment

7.2

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Application Security Tools (29th)

Software Risk Manager ASPM

Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

29th

Average Rating

0.0

Reviews Sentiment

7.0

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (21st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (14th)

Mindshare comparison

As of April 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of Contrast Security Assess is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Software Risk Manager ASPM is 1.0%, up from 0.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Mindshare Distribution
Product	Mindshare (%)
Contrast Security Assess	1.0%
Software Risk Manager ASPM	1.0%
Other	98.0%

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

Featured Reviews

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

Saravanan_Radhakrishnan

Senior Manager at Happiest Minds Technologies

Facilitates continuous assessment of applications, covering both static and dynamic security aspects

Code Dx lacks one aspect, the dynamic security part, known as DAST. It's not an on-premise solution; it's in the cloud now. There are compliance standards and data standards where the customer might need to have the data on-premises for dynamic security testing. So that is one shortfall. An area of improvement could be developing an on-premise DAST solution. The current one is a complete cloud-based solution, and that can be one of the areas of improvement.

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

"I am impressed with the product's identification of alerts and vulnerabilities."

"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."

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

"In our most critical applications, we have a deep dive in the code evaluation, which was something we usually did with periodic vulnerability assessments, code reviews, etc. Now, we have real time access to it. It's something that has greatly enhanced our code's quality. We have actually embedded a KPI in regards to the improvement of our code shell. For example, Contrast provides a baseline where libraries and the usability of the code are evaluated, and they produce a score. We always aim to improve that score. On a quarterly basis, we have added this to our KPIs."

"From a percentage perspective, somewhere around 90 percent of the time we used to spend has been given back to our team, because the false positive rate with Contrast is less than 5 percent."

"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."

"One of the key takeaways is that in order to have a secure application, you cannot rely on just the pentest, vulnerability assessments, and the periodicity of the reviews; you need the real-time feedback on that, and Contrast Assess offers that."

More Contrast Security Assess pros

"The customers were looking for something around static security and dynamic security, and in all those areas, they were looking for an industry leader with a proven solution. Synopsys is a Gartner leader, so I position this particular technology for the technical pre-sales part of it."

Cons

"Their level of support and troubleshooting for the product is limited because of how they handle troubleshooting. It's done through a log file that's very cumbersome to work with."

"Contrast's ability to support upgrades on the actual agents that get deployed is limited. Our environment is pretty much entirely Java. There are no updates associated with that. You have to actually download a new version of the .jar file and push that out to your servers where your app is hosted. That can be quite cumbersome from a change-management perspective."

"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. They have it in their roadmap to have these agents. If they have that, we will have complete coverage."

"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."

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

"The setup of the solution is different for each application. That's the one thing that has been a challenge for us. The deployment itself is simple, but it's tough to automate because each application is different, so each installation process for Contrast is different."

"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."

"My primary hurdle is that it doesn't support all of the technologies that we use."

More Contrast Security Assess cons

"The initial setup is a bit challenging because things are not easy. It needs a lot of technology adaptability plus the customer's environment-specific use cases."

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."

"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."

"The solution is expensive."

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

"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."

"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 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 is more of an enterprise solution for budget-conscious customers. So, it's moderately priced. It's not for everybody."

See which vendors are best for you

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

See recommendations

885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

Financial Services Firm

17%

Manufacturing Company

10%

Comms Service Provider

Computer Software Company

Financial Services Firm

16%

University

10%

Manufacturing Company

Construction Company

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

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

No data available

Comparisons

Veracode vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

FortiDevSec vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% of the time

Digital.ai Application Security vs Contrast Security Assess

Compared 5% 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

PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 20% of the time

Polaris Platform vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 9% of the time

Veracode vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 8% of the time

Checkmarx One vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 7% of the time

Snyk vs Software Risk Manager ASPM

Compared 6% of the time

More Software Risk Manager ASPM Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Contrast Security Assess

March 2026

Download Contrast Security Assess product report

Buyer's Guide

Application Security Posture Management (ASPM)

March 2026

Download Software Risk Manager ASPM product report

Also Known As

Contrast Assess

Code Dx

Overview

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

Software Risk Manager is an application security posture management (ASPM) solution that enables security and development teams to manage their application security programs at enterprise scale. By unifying policy, test orchestration, correlation, prioritization, and built-in static application security testing (SAST) and software composition analysis (SCA) engines, organizations can streamline their security activities across the enterprise.

Black Duck

Sample Customers

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

Discover why companies like: CGI said, "Synopsys and Software Risk Manager have provided the results we’re looking for".

Buyer's Guide

Static Application Security Testing (SAST)

March 2026

Download Free Report

Find out what your peers are saying about SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: March 2026.

DOWNLOAD NOW

885,444 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.

We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.