No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

FOSSA 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

FOSSA
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
9th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
15
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veracode
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Container Security (10th), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Software Composition Analysis (SCA) category, the mindshare of FOSSA is 2.6%, down from 3.3% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 5.9%, down from 9.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Software Composition Analysis (SCA) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode5.9%
FOSSA2.6%
Other91.5%
Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
 

Featured Reviews

reviewer2588340 - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
DK
Lead Information Security Analyst at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
Helps ensure that third-party libraries we're using are safe, but the scanning process can be more streamlined
It is somewhat complex compared to Fortify. As a Fortify user for almost five years, I find Veracode complex, but others in my team who have used it for eight to nine years don't find such issues. When we were doing manual scans before CI/CD integration, it was easier. It took approximately four to five months to onboard the solution because it was new to developers as well. There was a certain process to be followed to get access and integrate it into the CI/CD tools. We had to explain the report format to them, showing where they could find vulnerabilities and how they could fix the code, including finding safer versions of libraries and dependencies. This took almost half of 2023, and now in 2025, they do not need our help except for technical problems when there are numerous scans in the pipeline.

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 tool’s seamless integration and quick results."
"Being able to know the licenses of the libraries is most valuable because we sell products, and we need to provide to the customers the licenses that we are using."
"Overall, it's a great product."
"FOSSA suggests solutions for dependency mismatches."
"Policies and identification of open-source licensing issues are the most valuable features. It reduces the time needed to identify open-source software licensing issues."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I like Veracode's API. You can put it into a simple bash script and run your own security testing from your MacBook in less than 15 minutes."
"It's straightforward, and it does not require a lot of time. It's a straightforward platform that you can use for performing scans or mitigating issues. It has a very good user interface. FAQs are also helpful in case you are not familiar with it."
"The most valuable features of Veracode Static Analysis are its ability to work with GitLab and GitHub so that you can do the reviews and force the code."
"Developer Sandboxes help move scanning earlier within the SDLC."
"Allows us to track the remediation and handling of identified vulnerabilities."
"We have to look at it from the perspectives of how important it is to fix something and when it should be prioritized for fixing. The JSON output from the agent-based scans gives us the CVS core, and that makes things much easier."
"It has the ability to scale, and the fact that it doesn't produce a lot of false positives."
"If you have Azure DevOps and would like to understand your code and how secure it is, then there are not a lot of better options."
 

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."
"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."
"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."
"The reports don't really work that well for us. They do provide good information but they perform poorly with either the number of projects, or components, in the system."
"For open-source management, FOSSA's out-of-the-box policy engine is easy to use, but the list of licenses is not as complete as we would like it to be. They should add more open-source licenses to the selection."
"For open-source management, FOSSA's out-of-the-box policy engine is easy to use, but the list of licenses is not as complete as we would like it to be."
"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."
"One thing that can sometimes be difficult with FOSSA is understanding all that it can do."
"Veracode could be improved in terms of the UI platform as it could be more seamless, and if they allow different sessions in different browsers at the same time or in different tabs that would help tremendously."
"One area for improvement is the navigation in the UI. For junior developers or newcomers to the team, it can be confusing. The UI doesn't clearly bundle together certain elements associated with a scan. While running a scan, there are various aspects linked to it, but in the UI, they appear separate. It would be beneficial if they could redesign the UI to make it more intuitive for users."
"Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives."
"One of the most important areas that need improvement for Veracode is its DaaS. Veracode's DAST engines are primitive."
"Maybe the pipeline scanning doesn't support enough languages. It might only support Java and Python only, so that could be improved."
"The one thing I'd like to be able to do is schedule dynamic scans. Today we're kicking those off manually, but I believe that it's something have on their roadmap."
"We tried to create an automatic scanning process for Veracode and integrate it into our billing process, but it was easier to adopt it to repositories based on GIT."
"There is room for improvement in the speed of the system. Sometimes, the servers are very busy and slow."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"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."
"The solution's pricing is good and reasonable because you can literally use a lot of it for free."
"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 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."
"Licensing cost is on a yearly basis and there are no additional costs, the pricing is straightforward."
"It is an expensive solution, but it's the best solution available on the market. If you want something at the top, you have to pay a bit more than the average."
"The pricing of the product depends upon the number of codes or the number of applications."
"No issues, the pricing seems reasonable."
"Veracode's pricing is on the higher end, but it is acceptable."
"Veracode provides value for the cost, with no additional charges apart from the standard licensing fee."
"Negotiate some, but their prices are reasonable."
"Regarding licensing, pay very close attention to what applications you're going to need to do dynamic scanning for, versus static. Right now, the way the licensing is set up, if you don't have any static elements for a website, you can certainly avoid some costs by doing more dynamic licenses. You need to pay very close attention to that, because if you find out later that you have static code elements - like Java scripts, etc. - that you want to have scanned statically, having the two licenses bundled together will actually save you money."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions are best for your needs.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
19%
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Educational Organization
7%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise1
Large Enterprise8
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise45
Large Enterprise115
 

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...
What needs improvement with FOSSA?
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 lin...
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...
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 is the biggest difference between Veracode and Checkmarx?
According to my experience of using both the tools in different organizations Veracode is a Cloud-native, managed AppSec platform with strong focus on ease of use, it is SaaS delivery, and provide...
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

No data available
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

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.
Find out what your peers are saying about FOSSA vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
896,034 professionals have used our research since 2012.