We performed a comparison between Fortify Application Defender and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most valuable features of Fortify Application Defender are the code packages that are default."
"Fortify Application Defender's most valuable features are machine learning algorithms, real-time remediation, and automatic vulnerability notifications."
"The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time."
"The tool's most valuable feature is software composition analysis. This feature works well with my .NET applications, providing a better understanding of library vulnerabilities."
"The information from Fortify Application Defender on how to fix and solve issues is very good compared to other solutions."
"I find the configuration of rules in Fortify Application Defender useful. Its integration is also easy."
"Its ability to find security defects is valuable."
"The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization."
"The most valuable feature is the seamless automation of Veracode via the pipeline, in comparison to other solutions like Fortify SSC, which are complex to integrate through the pipeline."
"There is a single area on the dashboard where you can get a full view of all of the tests and the results from everything. There is a nice, very simple graphic that shows you the types of vulnerabilities that were found, their severity, the scoring, and in what part of the code they were found. All the details are together in one place."
"The pricing is worth it."
"The most valuable features are that you can do static analysis and dynamic analysis on a scheduled basis and that you can push the findings into JIRA."
"My experience with Veracode across the board every time, in all products, the technology, the product, the service, and the salespeople is fabulous."
"The most valuable feature is the static scan that checks for security issues."
"The static scan and the detailed reports, which include issue information and permissions, are the most valuable features."
"The solution is a specialist in SAST that you can rely on. Code scanning is fast with current, updated algorithms."
"The solution could improve the time it takes to scan. When comparing it to SonarQube it does it in minutes while in Fortify Application Defender it can take hours."
"I encountered many false positives for Python applications."
"The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it."
"The biggest complaint that I have heard concerns additional platform support because right now, it only supports applications that are written in .NET and Java."
"The false positive rate should be lower."
"The product should integrate industry-standard code review tools internally with its system. This would streamline the coding process, as developers wouldn't need multiple tools for code review and security checks. Many independent and open-source tools are available, from Apache to various libraries. Using multiple DevOps pipeline tools can slow the turnaround time."
"Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking."
"Fortify Application Defender gives a lot of false positives."
"We are testing Veracode's software composition analysis, but we're having trouble integrating it with SVN. It works out of the box when you use Git but doesn't work as well with other tools like SVN. It's more geared toward Git"
"I've seen slightly better static analysis tools from other companies when it comes to speed and ease of use."
"I would like to see more AI features. It's a current subject because with ChatGPT and other solutions being developed all the time, IT attacks will increase... To defend against those it's very important that the good guys use AI in ways that are good instead of bad."
"Veracode is a little costly. It's cost-effective for a large enterprise, but it may be too expensive for small businesses."
"One area for improvement is the navigation in the UI. For junior developers or newcomers to the team, it can be confusing. The UI doesn't clearly bundle together certain elements associated with a scan. While running a scan, there are various aspects linked to it, but in the UI, they appear separate. It would be beneficial if they could redesign the UI to make it more intuitive for users."
"From what we have seen of Veracode's SCA offering, it is just average."
"Veracode can improve the price model and how they bill the final offer to customers. It's based on the amount of traffic. For example, you can buy 1 gigabyte distributed across various applications, and each one can consume part of the whole allotment of traffic data."
"There should be more control for administrative users so that we can add and delete any functionality or module within the platform. We should not have to reach out to Veracode's customer support every time. We should be able to customize our modules."
Fortify Application Defender is ranked 30th in Application Security Tools with 11 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Fortify Application Defender is rated 7.8, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Useful for fast code review in devOps pipelines ". 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 ". Fortify Application Defender is most compared with Checkmarx One, CAST Application Intelligence Platform, Coverity, SonarQube and WhiteHat Dynamic, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, Snyk and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Fortify Application Defender vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools 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.
