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

Qwiet AI 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

Qwiet AI
Ranking in Application Security Tools
37th
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
34th
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
21st
Average Rating
10.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
1
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Veracode
Ranking in Application Security Tools
3rd
Ranking in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)
3rd
Ranking in Software Composition Analysis (SCA)
2nd
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
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 Application Security Tools category, the mindshare of Qwiet AI is 1.0%, up from 0.2% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 4.4%, down from 9.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Security Tools Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode4.4%
Qwiet AI1.0%
Other94.6%
Application Security Tools
 

Featured Reviews

SS
Senior Director of Engineering - Information Security at Apna
Effectively in identify and fix bugs early in the development lifecycle
When it comes to ShiftLeft, the most valuable feature is definitely its ease of use and cost-effectiveness. Previously, security professionals had to spend a lot of time and effort running around, asking people to fix issues in their products, architectures, code, and even networks. With ShiftLeft, everything becomes robust and secure from within. Instead of relying on external measures like Web Application Firewalls (WAF) that are applied from the outside in, ShiftLeft takes a proactive approach. It helps prevent issues from arising in the first place, making it much easier for both security teams and developers. It's also cost-effective because you don't have to constantly go back, make changes to the code, and then push it again. Writing secure code from the start ensures that there are no vulnerabilities when it goes live. So, I would say the main features of ShiftLeft are its cost-effectiveness and ease of adaptability or use.
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

"When it comes to ShiftLeft, the most valuable feature is definitely its ease of use and cost-effectiveness."
"It makes it very easy to track and monitor activity."
"It has improved the way our organization functions mostly because we can perfect the security issues on our products, allowing our product managers to plan fixes based on severity for specific releases and improving our external image by showing that we take security seriously and address issues in a timely way."
"The most valuable feature of Veracode is the binary scan feature for auditing, which allows us to audit the software without the source code."
"The pricing is worth it."
"I like Veracode's integration with our CI/CD. It automatically scans our code when we do the build. It can also detect any security flaws in our third-party libraries. Veracode is good at pinpointing the sections of code that have vulnerabilities."
"In that sense, the Veracode system, since we've been using it, has helped us identify and code correct over 34,000 security weaknesses."
"It has improved the quality of code being delivered for test and its vulnerability resolutions timeline has improved."
"It pinpoints the errors. Its accuracy is very interesting. It also elaborates on flaws, meaning it provides you with details about what is valid or not and how something can be fixed."
 

Cons

"Having support from senior management is crucial in making it mandatory for teams to collaborate with the security team throughout the development process."
"The current version of the application does not support testing for API."
"Reporting. Some of the reporting features of Veracode do need improvement. They do not have the most robust access to data. That would be a bit more beneficial to a lot of our clients as well as our actual in-house staff. I've been talking to our program management at Veracode about that, and that is actually on their radar to have that improved, I think actually this year."
"I've seen slightly better static analysis tools from other companies when it comes to speed and ease of use."
"To be able to upload source codes without being compiled. That’s one feature that drives us to see other sources."
"The runtime code analysis could be improved so that we can see every element in one place."
"Maybe the pipeline scanning doesn't support enough languages. It might only support Java and Python only, so that could be improved."
"When it comes to the speed of the pipeline scan, one of the things we have found with Veracode is that it's very fast with Java-based applications but a bit slow with C/C++ based applications."
"Maybe the pipeline scanning doesn't support enough languages. It might only support Java and Python only, so that could be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

Information not available
"The licensing and prices were upfront and clear. They stand behind everything that is said during the commercial phase and during the onboarding phase. Even the most irrelevant "that can be done" was delivered, no matter how important the request was."
"The cost of Veracode is high."
"I don't really get too involved in the cost sides of things that's in my job, I'm more of a technical focus, but I have heard from my manager and a couple other people that the solution is quite expensive."
"The pricing for Veracode is high, making it difficult for beginners to afford."
"Veracode's pricing is on the higher end, but it is acceptable."
"They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works."
"The cost of scanning code is cheaper. It's typically $0.50 per line of code. However, it's expensive to run a high-level process that would normally require a human security expert. For example, penetration testing costs about $1,000 per application for penetration testing. The cost of these features may be too high for smaller organizations. On the other hand, Veracode's interactive application security testing is fast and cheaper compared to other software."
"I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security Tools solutions are best for your needs.
893,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
13%
Retailer
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise45
Large Enterprise114
 

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

ShiftLeft
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Information Not Available
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, Checkmarx, Veracode and others in Application Security Tools. Updated: May 2026.
893,311 professionals have used our research since 2012.