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

Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Apr 6, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
7.2
Microsoft Defender for Cloud enhances security, reduces costs, and boosts productivity with proactive threat detection and seamless integration.
Sentiment score
6.9
Veracode improved code quality, security, and efficiency, leading to cost savings, faster releases, and enhanced operational benefits for organizations.
Defender proactively indexes and analyzes documents, identifying potential threats even when inactive, enhancing preventative security.
Identifying potential vulnerabilities has helped us avoid costly data losses.
The biggest return on investment is the rapid improvement of security posture.
The scanners of Veracode bring status of the weaknesses in the current infrastructure. It scans and provides reports regarding the servers, the network, and the applications running on those servers.
Regarding price, the evaluation should focus on how efficiently they will recover their investment, considering the time saved through the use of Veracode Fix, for example, and the ability to fix code at dev time compared to the problems faced when fixing after the product is already deployed.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.6
Microsoft Defender for Cloud support is praised for expertise but criticized for delays, inconsistent service, and ticket handling issues.
Sentiment score
7.4
Veracode provides effective, prompt support with knowledgeable staff, though response times and coordination occasionally need improvement.
Since security is critical, we prefer a quicker response time.
The support team was very responsive to queries.
They understand their product, but much like us, they struggle with the finer details, especially with new features.
Access to the engineering team is crucial for faster feedback on the product fix process.
They are very responsive and quick to help with queries within our scope.
They respond very quickly since security is something critical.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
7.8
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is highly scalable, managing diverse environments smoothly, with seamless integration and flexible subscriptions despite cost concerns.
Sentiment score
7.5
Veracode is scalable and effective for large user volumes, though some note potential scaling costs and manageable packaging challenges.
We are using infrastructure as a code, so we do not have any scalability issues with Microsoft Defender for Cloud implementation because our cloud automatically does it.
It has multiple licenses and features, covering infrastructures from a hundred to five hundred virtual machines, without any issues.
Defender won't replace our endpoint XDR, but it will likely adapt and support any growth in the Microsoft Cloud space.
Cloud solutions are easier to scale than on-premise solutions.
It has a good capacity to scale effectively.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
7.7
Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a stable, reliable environment with minor performance issues primarily due to outdated systems.
Sentiment score
8.0
Users find Veracode stable and reliable, with occasional well-communicated maintenance and improved stability, despite some glitches and false positives.
Defender's stability has been flawless for us.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is very stable.
Microsoft sometimes changes settings or configurations without transparency.
If the Veracode server is down, we experience many issues during the scan.
It's not that easy to onboard, but once they have been onboarded on the platform, and the pipeline configured alongside the product configured, it works effectively.
 

Room For Improvement

Microsoft Defender for Cloud needs better automation, integration, user-friendliness, documentation, pricing, real-time monitoring, and legacy support.
Veracode faces criticism for false positives, outdated UI, slow scans, high costs, and poor support for new technologies.
Microsoft, in general, could significantly improve its communication and support.
It would be beneficial to streamline recommendations to avoid unnecessary alerts and to refine the severity of alerts based on specific environments or environmental attributes.
The artificial intelligence features could be expanded to allow the system to autonomously manage security issues without needing intervention from admins.
If it could be integrated directly with code repositories such as Bitbucket or GitHub, without the need to create a pipeline to upload and decode code, it would simplify the code scan process significantly.
We had issues with scanning large applications. Scanning took a lot of time, so we kept it outside the DevOps pipeline to avoid delaying deployments.
A nice addition would be if it could be extended for scenarios with custom cleansers.
 

Setup Cost

Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides flexible pricing with a free version; costs vary by features, region, and enterprise needs.
Veracode's high pricing suits large enterprises but is challenging for smaller businesses, with negotiable terms for optimal value.
Every time we consider expanding usage, we carefully evaluate the necessity due to cost concerns.
We appreciate the licensing approach based on employee count rather than a big enterprise license.
Microsoft Defender for Cloud is pricey, especially for Kubernetes clusters.
It's not the most expensive solution.
If there's a security gap, you'll never know the cost or effect.
Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode.
 

Valuable Features

Microsoft Defender for Cloud enhances security with AI detection, compliance, seamless Azure integration, and multi-cloud support for streamlined protection.
Veracode integrates with CI/CD pipelines, offering fast scans, low false positives, and tools for efficient vulnerability management and compliance.
The most valuable feature for me is the variety of APIs available.
This feature significantly aids in threat detection and enhances the user experience by streamlining security management.
The most valuable feature is the recommendations provided on how to improve security.
It offers confidence by preventing exposure to vulnerabilities and helps ensure that we are not deploying vulnerable code into production.
The best features in Veracode include static analysis and the early detection of vulnerable libraries; it integrates with tools such as Jenkins.
It fixes issues directly in the IDE while you're doing it.
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft Defender for Cloud
Ranking in Container Security
6th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
78
Ranking in other categories
Vulnerability Management (7th), Container Management (9th), Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (2nd), Cloud Security Posture Management (CSPM) (4th), Cloud-Native Application Protection Platforms (CNAPP) (4th), Data Security Posture Management (DSPM) (5th), Microsoft Security Suite (7th), Compliance Management (5th)
Veracode
Ranking in Container Security
8th
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), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (2nd)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of Microsoft Defender for Cloud is 7.1%, down from 8.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 2.5%, down from 2.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Vibhor Goel - PeerSpot reviewer
A single tool for complete visibility and addressing security gaps
Currently, issues are structured in Microsoft Defender for Cloud at severity levels of high, critical, or warning, but these severity levels are not always right. For example, Microsoft might consider a port being open as critical, but that might not be the case for our company. Similarly, it might suggest closing some management ports, but you might need them to be able to log in, so the severity levels for certain things can be improved. Even though Microsoft Defender for Cloud provides a way to temporarily disable certain alerts or notifications without affecting our security score, it would be better to have more granularized control over these recommendations. Currently, we cannot even disable certain alerts or notifications. There should be an automated mechanism to design Azure policies based on the recommendations, possibly with AI integration. Instead of an engineer having to write a policy to fix security gaps, which is very time-consuming, there should be an inbuilt capability to auto-remediate everything and have proper control in place. Additionally, enabling Defender for Cloud at the resource group level, rather than only at the subscription level, would be beneficial.
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.
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
14%
Financial Services Firm
13%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Government
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

How is Prisma Cloud vs Azure Security Center for security?
Azure Security Center is very easy to use, integrates well, and gives very good visibility on what is happening across your ecosystem. It also has great remote workforce capabilities and supports a...
What do you like most about Microsoft Defender for Cloud?
The entire Defender Suite is tightly coupled, integrated, and collaborative.
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

Microsoft Azure Security Center, Azure Security Center, Microsoft ASC, Azure Defender
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Interactive Demo

Demo not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Microsoft Defender for Cloud is trusted by companies such as ASOS, Vatenfall, SWC Technology Partners, and more.
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 Microsoft Defender for Cloud vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: June 2025.
857,028 professionals have used our research since 2012.