We performed a comparison between Mend and Veracode based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Mend comes out ahead of Veracode. While both solutions offer fast vulnerability resolutions, Veracode’s higher licensing and delayed tech support leave room for improvement.
"The overall support that we receive is pretty good. "
"The inventory management as well as the ability to identify security vulnerabilities has been the most valuable for our business."
"We can take some measures to improve things, replace a library, or update a library which was too old or showed severe bugs."
"We use a lot of open sources with a variety of containers, and the different open sources come with different licenses. Some come with dual licenses, some are risky and some are not. All our three use cases are equally important to us and we found WhiteSource handles them decently."
"The reporting capability gives us the option to generate an open-source license report in a single click, which gets all copyright and license information, including dependencies."
"The best feature is that the Mend R&D team does their due diligence for all the vulnerabilities. In case they observe any important or critical vulnerabilities, such as the Log4j-related vulnerability, we usually get a dedicated email from our R&D team saying that this particular vulnerability has been exploited in the world, and we should definitely check our project for this and take corrective actions."
"Enables scanning/collecting third-party libraries and classifying license types. In this way we ensure our third-party software policy is followed."
"What is very nice is that the product is very easy to set up. When you want to implement Mend.io, it just takes a few minutes to create your organization, create your products, and scan them. It's really convenient to have Mend scanning your products in less than one hour."
"What I found most valuable in Veracode Static Analysis is that it categorizes security vulnerabilities."
"I don't have to have a team of developers behind me that keep up with all the latest threats because the subscription service they provide for me does that."
"There are quite a few features that are very reliable, like the newly launched Veracode Pipelines Scan, which is pretty awesome. It supports the synchronous pipeline pretty well. We been using it out of the Jira plugin, and that is fantastic."
"The coverage of the last vulnerabilities reported."
"The pricing is worth it."
"Veracode does not require any maintenance."
"Provides consistent evaluation and results without huge fluctuations in false positives or negatives."
"The Veracode support team is excellent."
"WhiteSource needs improvement in the scanning of the containers and images with distinguishing the layers."
"The initial setup could be simplified."
"The dashboard UI and UX are problematic."
"It should support multiple SBOM formats to be able to integrate with old industry standards."
"WhiteSource Prioritize should be expanded to cover more than Java and JavaScript."
"Mend lets you create custom policies. They're not too complicated to set up, but it would be helpful if they had some preconfigured policies to match what we have in Azure DevOps. That would save us a lot of time. It's tedious to configure the policies manually, and I lack the capacity to do it right now. Other products have preconfigured packs and templates, and Mend doesn't."
"On the reporting side, they could make some improvements. They are making the reports better and better, but sometimes it takes a lot of time to generate a report for our entire organization."
"The UI is not that friendly and you need to learn how to navigate easily."
"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)."
"There were some additional manual steps or work involved that we should not have needed to do."
"Static scanning takes a long time, so you need to patiently wait for the scan to achieve. I also think the software could be more accurate. It isn't 100 percent, so you shouldn't completely rely on Veracode. You need to manually verify its findings."
"I haven't heard about any problems so far. However, it would be great if Veracode automatically packaged stuff up for you."
"There needs to be better API integration to the development team's pipeline, which is something that is missing and needs to be improved."
"Sometimes the scans are not done quickly, but the solutions that it provides are really good. The quality is high, but the analysis is not done extremely quickly."
"Calypso (our application) is large and the results take up to two months. Further, we also have to package Calypso in a special manner to meet size guidelines."
"The interface is one thing I find a little challenging. Veracode's interface feels a little outdated compared to other solutions, and it could be modernized. I'm mostly happy with the features, but Vercaode could add Docker image scanning."
Mend.io is ranked 5th in Application Security Tools with 29 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Mend.io is rated 8.4, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Mend.io writes "Easy to use, great for finding vulnerabilities, and simple to set up". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Veracode writes "Helps to reduce false positives and prevent vulnerable code from entering production, but does not support incremental scanning ". Mend.io is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, Snyk, Checkmarx One and JFrog Xray, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and HCL AppScan. See our Mend.io vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
