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

SUSE NeuVector vs Veracode comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Sep 16, 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

SUSE NeuVector
Ranking in Container Security
17th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.3
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Cloud Workload Protection Platforms (CWPP) (19th)
Veracode
Ranking in Container Security
8th
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
202
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 July 2025, in the Container Security category, the mindshare of SUSE NeuVector is 2.4%, down from 3.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Veracode is 2.4%, down from 2.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Container Security
 

Featured Reviews

Danie Joubert - PeerSpot reviewer
Good value for money; great for policy management
Our model of deployment for this solution is on-premises. For people looking into this solution and trying to use it for the first time, I'd say make your life easier by using the SUSE product as well on top of your community scale stack. That makes your integration points a lot easier and smoother. I would also say during your initial setup, make sure that your clusters are already in terms of the capabilities with the version required. I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. The reason for this rating is that what they offer is solid, but they could expand their service and add more features just to make more things integrated into an enterprise itself.
Sajal Sharma - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers shift-left security strategy and helps us with the latest security configurations, OWASP standards, and SAST standards
It's robustness is the main benefit to the organization. As it gets upgraded with time, it also improves the coverage – security configuration coverages and vulnerability coverages. It also updates itself with the latest known vulnerabilities that are uploaded to the NVD, OWASP, or other databases. So it gets upgraded itself with that. And so with each upgrade, it gets better and better. The solution offers the ability to prevent vulnerable code from going into production. It provides us with a report containing multiple remediations and mitigations for each vulnerability. For example, if it finds a cross-site scripting vulnerability, it will also include references like CWE and CVE records, instructions on how to fix it, and the specific line of code or module where the vulnerability is present. This helps us fix the issues accordingly. I'm a penetration tester and DevSecOps engineer. I evaluate the findings, mark false positives, and manually exploit vulnerabilities if they exist. If we need further clarification, we raise a ticket with the Veracode team and get consultancy from them. We are a software development team. If we find a vulnerability, I exploit it and come back with the best possible mitigation, and the dev team fixes it. If we use Veracode Fix, it might use third-party implementations or make changes we aren't aware of. We need to be very aware of what our application is using internally. It should be known to us. As per my experience, the solution's policy reporting ensures compliance with industry standards. It comes with multiple features. I get the most out of it, and it's good. The solution provides visibility into application status at every phase of development. Like static analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition, and manual penetration tests - throughout the SDLC We have a pipeline that I maintain. I use the Veracode API account and have integrated it with AWS and our Jenkins pipeline. We use Snyk for SCA and Veracode for SAST scanning. At the earliest stage of the build, the SAST scan runs along with the JS and PHP files. It provides us with reports, which are then handed over to the other tools we depend on. If I validate the report or check the Veracode dashboard and find vulnerabilities, I mark them as false positives or existing issues. We work on multiple projects, but the one I'm handling these days only uses Veracode for SAST. It's been about one and a half years since I've been working with Veracode and this project. It is quite impressive. There are some things Veracode cannot find, like code obfuscations inside the code and some insecure randoms. Sometimes, it misses those flaws. But overall, if I compare it with other tools, it is better. I will definitely recommend others to use this tool. We run the scan before each deployment. If the dev team builds a new module or something, we scan it along with all the files. If we find anything, we get it fixed. That's how it works. Veracode is quite important to the organization's shift-left security strategy because we make a scan for each deployment. Sometimes, if I think we need to perform a shift-left, I just make a scan before deployment and check for any misconfiguration or vulnerability in the code.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is the performance, deployment, and cost."
"When it comes to the price, we got a really good deal from the vendor instantly."
"The UI has a lot of features."
"The features of image scanning and anti-malware are really valuable."
"The initial setup is quite good, it's straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security."
"The solution includes many features, not only for container and client security but also for scanning nodes, networks, and vulnerabilities."
"The ease of integration with Bitbucket pipelines and Git pipelines is vital for us."
"What I found most valuable in Veracode Static Analysis is that it categorizes security vulnerabilities."
"The capability to identify vulnerable code is the most valuable feature of Veracode."
"The static scan is the feature that we use the most, as it gives us insight into our source code. We have it integrated with our continuous integration, continuous delivery system, so we can get insight quickly."
"Informs me of code security vulnerabilities. Bamboo build automation with Veracode API calls are used.​"
"Static scanning and software composition analysis are very helpful. I and my colleagues don't need to be an expert on all of those ancillary things, so we can focus more on the business deliverables."
"The Veracode technical support is very good. They are responsive and very knowledgeable."
"This is a great tool for learning about potential vulnerabilities in code."
 

Cons

"SUSE NeuVector could improve by increasing its visibility into other elements of the DevSecOps pipeline. Additionally, scanning around infrastructure would be helpful."
"SUSE NeuVector should provide more security protection rules and better container image scanning."
"We are also working with IaaS VMS, but NeuVector doesn't support virtual machines."
"I would say that this solution should improve monitoring and reporting. I would also like to see more integrations so that we could essentially make it a part of a developing pipeline."
"The tool should offer seamless integration of other security tools while in a hybrid environment."
"The image-scanning features need improvement."
"Using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features between two clusters and could be improved."
"The documentation needs to improve a bit."
"The only notable problem we have had is that when new versions of Swift have come out, we have found Veracode tends to be a bit behind in updates to support the new language changes."
"It would help to have more training for developers to help them set it up."
"We connected with Veracode's support a couple of times, and we got a different answer each time."
"When we scan binary, when we perform binary analysis, it could go faster. That has a lot to do with the essence of scanning binary code, it takes a little bit longer. Certain aspects, depending on what type of code it is, take a little long, especially legacy code."
"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. Until now, our source control repository was Azure DevOps Server (Microsoft TFS) to managing our resources. This was not something that they supported. It took us some sessions together before we successfully implemented it."
"There should be more APIs, especially in SCA, to get some results or automate some things."
"Another thing I need is continued support for the new languages today that are popular. Most of them are scripting languages more so than real, fourth-generation, commercial grade stuff; we're evolving. Most applications are using so much open-source that, quite frankly, it would be great to see Veracode, or anybody else, extend their platform to where they are able to help secure open-source platforms or repositories."
"It's very expensive for a small organization."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution."
"The solution's pricing could be better. The cost of a subscription is calculated on the basis of work."
"Licensing fees are paid yearly."
"The price of SUSE NeuVector is low. There is an additional cost for support."
"Its cost for what we needed it for was too high. It wasn't too high for other companies and it was competitively priced, but for us, it just didn't fit. We did plan to use it and increase the usage. In the end, it may have been abandoned because of the cost, but I'm not a hundred percent sure. So, even though we had planned on using it more and more, because of the cost and the business conditions of things, we didn't have the opportunity to really use it more."
"We use this product per project rather than per developer... Your development model will really determine what the best fit is for you in terms of licensing, because of the project-based licensing. If you do a few projects, that's more attractive. If you have a large number of developers, that would also make the product a little more attractive."
"The licensing cost for Veracode is fair."
"Veracode's price is high. I would like them to better optimize their pricing."
"If you're licensing, and you're looking at licensing models, you might want to ask Veracode about their microservice, depending on the company. If you are a microservice architecture, I would suggest asking them about their microservice pricing. I would suggest that you evaluate that with your code and their other licensing model, which is like a lump sum in size of artifacts, and just make sure that you price that out with them, because there might be some tradeoffs that can be made in price."
"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."
"The worst part about the product is that it does not scale at all. Also, microservices apps will cost you a fortune."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Container Security solutions are best for your needs.
863,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
18%
Financial Services Firm
15%
Government
10%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Computer Software Company
16%
Financial Services Firm
16%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Insurance Company
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about NeuVector?
The most valuable feature of SUSE NeuVector is its run-time security.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for NeuVector?
SUSE NeuVector is an open-source solution. You have to pay for the support.
What needs improvement with NeuVector?
One area for improvement is NeuVector's ability to import CVEs from different sources. Additionally, using a node port instead of a cluster IP is less ideal when implementing federation features be...
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

NeuVector
Crashtest Security , Veracode Detect
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Figo, Clear Review, Arvato Bertelsmann, Experian, Chime
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 SUSE NeuVector vs. Veracode and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
863,901 professionals have used our research since 2012.