We performed a comparison between Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis and Veracode based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I appreciate the user-friendly interface. The GUI is excellent, providing detailed information on outdated versions, including version numbers and the flow of library calls. This allows me to plan and prioritize library changes based on potential vulnerabilities, even if the affected library is indirectly used in my project. The tool offers specific guidance on addressing these issues."
"What's most valuable in Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is that it provides security from the start. In the traditional approach, an enterprise or company validates the solution before launching to a production environment, but in the modern approach, security must be checked and provided from the beginning and from the design, and this is where Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis comes in. The solution helps you make sure that every open-source application that you use is secure, and that there's no vulnerability inside that open-source application."
"What's most valuable in Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is its ability to identify vulnerabilities in open-source components, especially if some critical issues exist."
"The product is stable and scalable."
"The customer service and support were good."
"The integration part is easy...It's a stable solution right now."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is the comprehensive security scan."
"The dependency graph visualization provides the ability to see nested dependencies within libraries for pinpointing vulnerabilities."
"All the features provided by Veracode are valuable, including static scan, dynamic scan, and MPT (Manual Penetration Testing)."
"The Static and Dynamic Analysis capabilities are very valuable to us. They've improved the speed of the inspection process."
"It has caught lots of flaws that could have been exploited, like SQL injection flaws. It has also improved developer engagement with information security."
"The most valuable feature is the security and vulnerability parts of the solution. It shows medium to high vulnerabilities so we can find them, then upgrade our model before it is too late. It is useful because it automates security. Also, it makes things more efficient. So, there is no need for the security team to scan every time. The application team can update it whenever possible in development."
"It eases integration into our workflow. Veracode is part of our Jenkins build, so whenever we build our software, Jenkins will automatically submit the code bundle over to Veracode, which automatically kicks off the static analysis. It sends an email when it's done, and we look at the report."
"It changes the DevSecOps process because we find flaws much earlier in the development life cycle, and we also spot third-party software that we don't allow on developers' machines."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its extensive reporting capabilities and user-friendly interface."
"Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis should improve dynamic analysis."
"Its pricing can be improved. It is a little bit high priced. It would be better if it was a little less expensive. It is a good tool, and we're still figuring out how to fully leverage it. There are some questions regarding whether it can scan the MuleSoft code. We don't know if this is a gap in the tool or something else. This is one thing that we're just working through right now, and I am not ready to conclude that there is a weakness there. MuleSoft is kind of its own beast, and we're trying to see how we get it to work with Checkmarx."
"API security is an area with shortcomings that needs improvement."
"I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten."
"In terms of areas for improvement, what could be improved in Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is pricing because customers always compare the pricing among secure DevOps solutions in the market. Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis has a lot of competitors yet its features aren't much different. Pricing is the first thing customers consider, and from a partner perspective, if you can offer affordable pricing to your customers, it's more likely you'll have a winning deal. The performance of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis also needs improvement because sometimes, it's slow, and in particular, scanning could take several hours."
"Some of the recommendations provided by the product are generic. Even if the recommendations provided by the product are of low level, the appropriate ones can help users deal with vulnerabilities."
"Personally, I currently use it as a standalone tool without integrating it with other systems, and it meets my needs adequately. As a suggestion, I request on considering to add a "what if" feature to the application. Currently, when the tool identifies issues and suggests updates, if I want to explore different scenarios, I need to prepare another file, turn it into a ZIP, and run the analysis again. It would be more convenient if there was a "what if" option in the GUI. This feature could simulate a run, allowing me to quickly check the impact of changing one or more files or versions without the need for a full rerun."
"I have received complaints from my customers that the pricing could be improved."
"There is room for improvement in documentation."
"All areas of the solution could use some improvement."
"The cost of the solution is a little bit expensive. Expensive in the sense that there was a hundred percent increase in cost from last year to this year, which is certainly not justified."
"To be able to upload source codes without being compiled. That’s one feature that drives us to see other sources."
"The reporting was detailed, but there were some things that were missing. It showed us on which line an error was found, but it could have been more detailed."
"Another problem we have is that, while it is integrated with single sign-on—we are using Okta—the user interface is not great. That's especially true for a permanent link of a report of a page. If you access it, it goes to the normal login page that has nothing that says "Log in with single sign-on," unlike other software as a service that we use. It's quite bothersome because it means that we have to go to the Okta dashboard, find the Veracode link, and log in through it. Only at that point can we go to the permanent link of the page we wanted to access."
"In the last month or so, I had a problem with the APIs when doing some implementations. The Veracode support team could be more specific and give me more examples. They shouldn't just copy the URL for a doc and send it to me."
"The product has issues with scanning."
More Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis Pricing and Cost Advice →
Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is ranked 8th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 12 reviews while Veracode is ranked 3rd in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 194 reviews. Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is rated 9.2, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis writes "Comprehensive security scan, helpful support, and high availability". 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 ". Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis is most compared with Black Duck, JFrog Xray, Semgrep Supply Chain, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and FOSSA, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Snyk, Fortify on Demand and OWASP Zap. See our Checkmarx Software Composition Analysis vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Software Composition Analysis (SCA) vendors.
We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.
