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

Rapid7 InsightAppSec 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

Rapid7 InsightAppSec
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
5th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
6.7
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
AI Observability (15th)
Veracode
Ranking in Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
207
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (3rd), Static Application Security Testing (SAST) (3rd), Container Security (10th), Software Composition Analysis (SCA) (2nd), Static Code Analysis (1st), Application Security Posture Management (ASPM) (1st)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2026, in the Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) category, the mindshare of Rapid7 InsightAppSec is 5.8%, up from 4.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 15.7%, down from 27.4% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Veracode15.7%
Rapid7 InsightAppSec5.8%
Other78.5%
Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST)
 

Featured Reviews

Shritam Bhowmick - PeerSpot reviewer
Vulnerability Management Lead at garrett
Provides reliable applications security but needs better integration options
There are areas for improvements regarding false positives. Integration capabilities are lacking, as options for integrations with other tools such as SNOW, Jira, or other integration tools are not sufficient in Rapid7 InsightAppSec. The user interface sometimes has glitches, which may prevent appropriate results during navigation, and even when we get appropriate results, it can be impossible to export them to CSV records or download files. Regarding scalability, Rapid7 InsightAppSec is not a scalable solution for our industry due to limited integration capabilities. Rapid7 relies on another tool called InsightConnect, which requires additional investment, detracting from scalability. Another area that needs improvement is the integration of AI capabilities into the platform. Both Rapid7 InsightAppSec and InsightVM need to advance in that area. In terms of behavioral and pattern recognition, identifying complex attacks such as SQL, blind SQL, JSON, and LDAP injections often results in 94% false positives. This necessitates improvement in their behavioral-based analytics feature.
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

"It is very convenient to get reports from the tool, which offers high-level environmental statistics."
"I rate stability ten out of ten."
"You have various attack modules, and you also have the Attack Replay feature for the attack sequence. You can reproduce an attack and see it. That is a very good feature I noticed in this solution. It helps developers as well."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec helps us in both regulatory compliance and in strengthening our security posture."
"This is a product that I recommend and my advice for anybody who is interested in trying it, there is a free 60-day trial period where they will fix your problems without any payment."
"Relatively speaking, InsightAppSec is good compared to Insight VM."
"For our needs, Rapid7 was the ideal go-to tool."
"The stability has been very good; I would rate it five out of five in terms of reliability, as it doesn't crash or freeze, there are no bugs or glitches, and the performance is good."
"The article scanning is excellent, the composition analysis and common CBEs attached to it are quite good, and the solution offers a lot of really great analysis with lots of good data support."
"It provides security of different Shadow IT activities in our environment, especially around application development and website hosting."
"We like the fact that all the issues are identified and that Veracode provides sufficient information on how to resolve them."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"It allows us to prove our security levels to vendors, and additionally helps us with our HIPAA security policies."
"The product provides guidance to develop secure software."
"The installation was straightforward."
"It's not "one policy fits all." I really like that Veracode allows me to set up specific policies that I can apply to applications."
 

Cons

"When you add new projects for the same product, it either duplicates or replaces the scan configuration. If I run a scan for the same product with a different scan configuration, it should keep the previous scan configuration and not replace it with the new scan configuration. It should just add the new scan configuration. That would be helpful. They do keep the results as it is, but the scan configuration keeps changing. For example, I have set a scan configuration to a full scan, and next week, I want to run a new scan for the same product with some changes or new functionalities. I want to run a partial scan. Currently, if I change the scan configuration to partial, it changes the old one also to partial. That should be improved."
"The reporting feature of Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement as it currently provides basic reports."
"We'd like to see integrations with WAF solutions."
"The technical support from Rapid7 is not bad, but the response time can be quite slow sometimes."
"The reporting is definitely an aspect of the solution that's in need of some work. We found that we'd try to use widgets, but often getting them to work for us wasn't very clear. They need to be more user friendly or offer better instructions."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec needs improvement in detecting phishing pages."
"Scanning can be better. When you add new projects for the same product, it either duplicates or replaces the scan configuration."
"I required a solution to manage on-premises, but I was not as satisfied as expected."
"If the dynamic scan is improved, then the speed might go up. That is somehow not happening. We have raised this concern. It might also help if they could time limit scans to 24 hours instead of letting them go for three days. Then, whatever results could be shared, even if the scan is not complete, that would definitely help us."
"Some features could be improved in terms of user-friendliness."
"It needs better controls to include/exclude specific sections when creating a report that can be shared externally with customers and prospects."
"Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them."
"Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives."
"The reports on offer are too verbose."
"Technical support was difficult at times due to off-shore support that seemed to be reading from a script and not really understanding our issue."
"I found that there were far too many warnings and some false positives."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"They offer a good price, but I don't remember its cost. It is fair as compared to the competition. We have opted for project-based licensing, not user-based. We can add any number of users. That doesn't matter. It is worth the money."
"The price of this product is very cheap."
"I rate Rapid7 InsightAppSec’s pricing an eight out of ten."
"I'm not sure how much it costs exactly, but I know it's expensive."
"Rapid7 InsightAppSec is cheap."
"Its price is competitive. It is not expensive."
"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."
"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."
"Veracode is expensive. But the solution is worth it."
"I think it's a great value. It's at a price point that a small company like mine can afford to use versus, if it was too exorbitant, I wouldn't be able to use this product. The cost of the license is small in comparison to the value it brings"
"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."
"We're very comfortable with their model. We think they're a good value. We worked very closely with Veracode on understanding their license model, understanding what comprises the fee and what does not. With their assistance in design, we decomposed our application in a way where we are scanning a very significant amount of code without wasting their capacity and generating redundant reported issues. You scan in profiles, per se. And we work with them, in their offices, to design the most effective approach. So the advice I would have for customers is, you can get up and live fast, but work closely with Veracode to refine the method you use for scanning and the way you compile the applications. There's a concept called entry-point scanning, and that's probably not used well by the rest of their customers. We see our licensing as a good value because we leverage it heavily."
"The product’s price is a bit higher compared to other solutions."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Dynamic Application Security Testing (DAST) solutions are best for your needs.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Manufacturing Company
13%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Government
10%
Computer Software Company
9%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Computer Software Company
11%
Manufacturing Company
11%
Government
5%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business12
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise5
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business69
Midsize Enterprise45
Large Enterprise114
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
Customers sometimes experience issues with performance. One thing that I recall is that most customers often want to have reporting as per their customized dashboard. This needs to be improved beca...
What is your primary use case for Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I usually recommend this solution for financial institutions. Banks and financial institutions need this solution mostly because they have to follow stringent compliance advisory requirements, so t...
What advice do you have for others considering Rapid7 InsightAppSec?
I have not heard any complaints. I do not have any recommendations because customers were initially worried about the number of scans they used to perform, and now it has been enhanced or it will s...
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.
 

Also Known As

InsightAppSec
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

CenterPoint Energy, CPA Australia, Hypertherm, First American Financial Corporation, Rackspace
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 Rapid7 InsightAppSec vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: April 2026.
892,487 professionals have used our research since 2012.