We performed a comparison between Snyk and Veracode based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Snyk comes out ahead of Veracode. Veracode has a higher cost and the Static and SAST scans may not be as user-friendly to developers.
"The solution has great features and is quite stable."
"Static code analysis is one of the best features of the solution."
"Snyk categorizes the level of vulnerability into high, medium, and low, which helps organizations prioritize which issues to tackle first."
"It has a nice dashboard where I can see all the vulnerabilities and risks that they provided. I can also see the category of any risk, such as medium, high, and low. They provide the input priority-wise. The team can target the highest one first, and then they can go to medium and low ones."
"Its reports are nice and provide information about the issue as well as resolution. They also provide a proper fix. If there's an issue, they provide information in detail about how to remediate that issue."
"It has an accurate database of vulnerabilities with a low amount of false positives."
"The most valuable feature of Snyk is the SBOM."
"We have integrated it into our software development environment. We have it in a couple different spots. Developers can use it at the point when they are developing. They can test it on their local machine. If the setup that they have is producing alerts or if they need to upgrade or patch, then at the testing phase when a product is being built for automated testing integrates with Snyk at that point and also produces some checks."
"The CSCA vulnerability scanning is useful."
"It helps me to detect vulnerabilities."
"One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important."
"Code scanning is the most valuable feature."
"The static scan is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is Veracode SDP, which allows for something related to third-party vulnerabilities. When we build a product, we use a lot of third-party libraries instead of building everything from scratch. We just use a library which is already been built; we just use that component in our product. Sometimes, these libraries may have bugs or issues, and it's hard to keep track of them because we use thousands of them."
"I like Veracode's static scanning and SCA. We use three static scans, software composition analysis, and dynamic scans. We haven't used dynamic scanning as much, but we're trying to integrate that into our environment more."
"Veracode supports a broad range of code technologies, and it can analyze large applications. Fortify takes a long time and may not be able to generate the report for larger applications. We don't have these constraints with Veracode."
"Generating reports and visibility through reports are definitely things they can do better."
"They were a couple of issues which happened because Snyk lacked some documentation on the integration side. Snyk is lacking a lot of documentation, and I would like to see them improve this. This is where we struggle a bit. For example, if something breaks, we can't figure out how to fix that issue. It may be a very simple thing, but because we don't have the proper documentation around an issue, it takes us a bit longer."
"We've also had technical issues with blocking newly introduced vulnerabilities in PRs and that was creating a lot of extra work for developers in trying to close and reopen the PR to get rid of some areas. We ended up having to disable that feature altogether because it wasn't really working for us and it was actually slowing down developer velocity."
"The tool should provide more flexibility and guidance to help us fix the top vulnerabilities before we go into production."
"There are some new features that we would like to see added, e.g., more visibility into library usage for the code. Something along the lines where it's doing the identification of where vulnerabilities are used, etc. This would cause them to stand out in the market as a much different platform."
"We have seen cases where tools didn't find or recognize certain dependencies. These are known issues, to some extent, due to the complexity in the language or stack that you using. There are some certain circumstances where the tool isn't actually finding what it's supposed to be finding, then it could be misleading."
"It can be improved from the reporting perspective and scanning perspective. They can also improve it on the UI front."
"We would like to have upfront knowledge on how easy it should be to just pull in an upgraded dependency, e.g., even introduce full automation for dependencies supposed to have no impact on the business side of things. Therefore, we would like some output when you get the report with the dependencies. We want to get additional information on the expected impact of the business code that is using the dependency with the newer version. This probably won't be easy to add, but it would be helpful."
"The scanning takes a lot of time to complete."
"Improving sorting through findings reports to filter by only what is critically relevant will help developers focus on issues."
"The language version support could be improved."
"Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives."
"Veracode Static Analysis could improve the terminology. For example, I do not know what the sandbox scan does. The terminology and the way they have used it are quite confusing. They should have a process of capturing problems that users are having on their end."
"They could improve how they fix vulnerabilities. They could have more support in place to help the developers."
"An area for improvement in Veracode is the time that it takes to scan large projects, as that makes it difficult to fit into our CI/CD pipelines."
"From the usability perspective, it is not up to date with the latest trends. It looks very old. Tools such as Datadog, New Relic, or infrastructure security tools, such as AWS Cloud, seem very user-friendly. They are completely web-based, and you can navigate through them pretty quickly, whereas Veracode is very rigid. It is like an old-school enterprise application. It does the job, but they need to invest a little more on the usability front."
Snyk is ranked 4th in Application Security Tools with 41 reviews while Veracode is ranked 2nd in Application Security Tools with 194 reviews. Snyk is rated 8.2, while Veracode is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Snyk writes "Performs software composition analysis (SCA) similar to other expensive tools". 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 ". Snyk is most compared with SonarQube, Black Duck, GitHub Advanced Security, Fortify Static Code Analyzer and Checkmarx One, whereas Veracode is most compared with SonarQube, Checkmarx One, Fortify on Demand, OWASP Zap and Fortify Static Code Analyzer. See our Snyk vs. Veracode report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors, best Container Security 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.
