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

NowSecure vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

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

NowSecure
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
35th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
Mobile App Testing Tools (20th)
Veracode
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
208
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (2nd), Container Security (8th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (3rd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2026, in the Static Application Security Testing (SAST) category, the mindshare of NowSecure is 0.5%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 5.3%, down from 10.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Static Application Security Testing (SAST) Market Share Distribution
ProductMarket Share (%)
Veracode5.3%
NowSecure0.5%
Other94.2%
Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
 

Featured Reviews

AN
Quality Assurance and Analyst Intern at a university with 201-500 employees
Scalable and reliable, but dynamic analysis needs improvement
I would advise others when testing using NowSecure to do secondary tests with other tools. For example, set it up in the local environment and recheck what the results of the reports are. Since the dynamic results are less accurate, I would suggest using static analysis. I rate NowSecure a seven out of ten.
reviewer2703864 - PeerSpot reviewer
Head of Security Architecture at a healthcare company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Onboarding developers successfully while improving code security through IDE integration
Regarding room for improvement, we have some problems when onboarding new projects because the build process has to be done in a certain way, as Veracode analyzes the binaries and not the code by itself alone. If the process is not configured correctly, it doesn't work. That's one of the things that we are discussing with Veracode. Something positive that we've been able to do is submit formal feature requests to them, and they are working on them; they've already solved some of them. This encourages us to propose new ideas and improvements. Another improvement that we asked for this use case is to be able to configure how Veracode Fix proposes and fixes because sometimes it makes proposals using libraries that go against our architecture design made by the enterprise architecture team. For example, we want them to propose using another library, and that's something we already asked Veracode, and they are working on it. We want to specify when you see this kind of vulnerability, you can only propose these two options.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is the ability to download an application without actually putting in the APK. It gives us an option to put the APK in if we want to but we can download it from the App Store and Play Store."
"The most important features, I would say, are the scanning abilities and the remediation abilities within the product. Scanning because, obviously, we want to make sure that our application code is flaw-free. And the remediation tools are helpful to the developers to help them track and manage their flaws."
"Static analysis scanning engine is a key feature."
"It changes the DevSecOps process because we find flaws much earlier in the development life cycle, and we also spot third-party software that we don't allow on developers' machines."
"It's hard to say that any single feature is the most essential. There are many errors and vulnerabilities in software today in the standard libraries for different vendors because. We don't need to reinvent the wheel every time because we're using standard libraries, and it's important to know that your security isn't compromised because you are using libraries with vulnerabilities."
"The static scan and the detailed reports, which include issue information and permissions, are the most valuable features."
"Code scanning is the most valuable feature."
"For our rapid, secure DevOps cycle, we have integration of the Vericode API into our build tool, and Greenlight into our IDE."
"It is easy to use for us developers. It supports so many languages: C#, .NET Core, .NET Framework, and it even scans some of our JavaScript. You just need the extension to upload the files and the reports are generated with so much detail."
 

Cons

"In this solution, there are two kinds of testing, static analysis, and dynamic analysis. There needs some improvement in testing with dynamic analysis because I have found it is not accurate"
"Veracode can be slow at times and has room for improvement, which may cause delays in our products and prolonged static scans."
"I am expecting some AI-related features in it. Also, if someone is using AI-generated code, Veracode should be able to detect that."
"The cost of the solution is a little bit expensive. Expensive in the sense that there was a hundred percent increase in cost from last year to this year, which is certainly not justified."
"Its cost and the long scanning times for large applications are the areas for improvement."
"Veracode Static Analysis could improve the terminology. For example, I do not know what the sandbox scan does. The terminology and the way they have used it are quite confusing. They should have a process of capturing problems that users are having on their end."
"Scanning large amounts of code can be a time-consuming process and there is scope for improvement."
"The static analysis is prone to a lot of false positives. But that's how it is with most static analysis tools... Also, the static analysis can sometimes take a little while. The time that it takes to do a scan should be improved."
"The user interface could be more sleek. Some scanning requirements aren't flexible. Some features take some time for new users to understand (like what exactly "modules" are)."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"For enterprises, Veracode has done a fairly good job, but its pricing is not suitable for startups. The microservice distributed architecture for a startup is very small. I had to do a lot of discussions on the pricing initially. I previously worked in an enterprise organization where I used Veracode, and that's how I got to know about Veracode, but that was a big organization with more than a thousand employees. So, the cost is very different for them because the size of the application is different. Its pricing makes sense there, but when we try to onboard this solution for the startup ecosystem, pricing is not friendly. Because I knew the product and I knew its value, I onboarded it, but I don't think any other startup at our scale will onboard it."
"Get a license at the beginning of a project. Don't wait until the end, because you want to use the product throughout the entire software development lifecycle, not just at the end. You could be surprised, and not in a positive way, with all the vulnerabilities there are in your code."
"Pricing-wise, I find it a bit expensive because it's based on the number of users requesting access to Veracode."
"The solution is expensive."
"I found Veracode very expensive, though I'm not the person paying for it. I was surprised to find out how much the subscription costs and that the executive board approved it, but it was a no-brainer because now my company has better security scans."
"To my knowledge, licensing for Veracode Static Analysis is paid yearly by my company."
"Without getting too specific, I'd say the average yearly cost is around $50,000. The costs include licensing and maintenance support."
"Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions are best for your needs.
881,346 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
15%
Retailer
13%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Insurance Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
17%
Computer Software Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise44
Large Enterprise115
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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 Static Analysis?
I like its integration with GitHub. I like using it from GitHub. I can use the GitHub URL and find out the vulnerabilities.
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

Vaporstream, FIS, MEA Financial, Silent Circle, Capital One, Citi, EY, EMC, Emerson, Kaiser Permanente, The Home Depot, Humana, Shell, Kellogg's, TD Bank, VMware
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 SonarSource Sàrl, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Updated: January 2026.
881,346 professionals have used our research since 2012.