Veracode
How does Fluid Attacks' solution compare to Veracode's? The following comparison table enables you to
discern the performance of both providers across various attributes essential for meeting your company’s
cybersecurity needs. To better understand each attribute, read their descriptions in the dedicated page.
Organization
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
Focus
|
Native ASPM with in-house scanners
|
||
|
Extras
|
None
|
None
|
MPT and PTaaS
|
|
Headcount
|
547 | ||
| Headcount distribution |
Engineering 42%, IT 13%, sales 13%,
marketing 2%, operations 4% and others 26%
|
Engineering 27%, IT 17%, sales 14%,
marketing 3%, operations 3% and others 36%
|
|
| Headcount growth |
+8%, +10%, -8%
|
+3%, -9%, -22%
|
|
|
Headquarters
|
CO and US
|
GB and US
|
|
|
Countries
|
AR, BO, CA, CL, CO, DO, MX, PA, PE and
US
|
UK and US | |
|
Reputation
|
Same
|
8.49 from 768 reviews over 10 years on
Capterra, G2, Gartner, PeerSpot and TrustRadius
|
|
|
Followers
|
Same
|
110K based on the following social
media: Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, X and YouTube
|
|
| Research firms |
None
|
None
|
451 Research, Everest Group, Forrester,
Frost & Sullivan and IDC
|
|
Founded
|
2001 |
2006
|
|
|
Funding
|
Bootstrapped
|
Same
|
$114.3M USD in 7 rounds from 14
investors
|
|
Acquisitions
|
None
|
None
|
Acquired 0 times and made 5
acquisitions
|
|
Revenue
|
10M to 15M
|
100M to 500M
|
|
| CVEs as CNA Researcher |
Not applicable, as it is not a CNA
Researcher
|
||
|
Compliance
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
SOC 2 Type II and SOC 3
|
|
| Bug bounty |
No
|
||
|
Visits
|
21K
per month. Top 3: 26% CO, 8% FR, 7% US. Others 59%
|
123K per month. Top 3: 33% US, 32% BR,
5% UK. Others 30%
|
|
|
Authority
|
45 out of 100
|
||
| Public vulnerability DB |
Discovered and third-party
|
Discovered and third-party
|
|
|
Content
|
Same
|
Blog, documentation, e-books,
infographics, podcast, videos, webinars and white papers
|
|
| Comprehensive documentation |
13 documentation sections, 6 in common
and 7 additional
|
7 documentation sections, 6 in common and 1 additional | |
|
Community
|
Forum
|
||
|
Sync training
|
1 workshop
|
No
|
|
|
Async training
|
3 product use courses, all free
|
Security education platform with 55
courses (subscription-based) and 58 security education courses
(subscription-based)
|
|
|
Distribution
|
Same
|
Direct or with any of its 545 partners
|
|
| Marketplaces | AWS and Azure | ||
|
Freemium
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Free trial
|
14-day free trial and PoV
|
||
|
Demo
|
Yes
|
||
| Open demo |
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Pricing
|
Contact sales and marketplaces
|
||
|
Pricing tiers
|
1 plan
|
1 plan
|
3 plans (SAST, DAST, SCA). None
transparent.
|
|
Minimum term
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum payment period
|
Annually
|
||
|
Minimum capabilities
|
ASPM, binary SAST, containers, CSPM, DAST, IaC, SAST, SCA and
secrets
|
Same plus: API
security testing, PTaaS, RE and SCR
|
SAST |
|
Minimum scope
|
1 author
|
No information available
|
|
|
Pricing drivers
|
Authors and techniques
|
||
|
Minimum monthly payment
|
No information available
|
||
|
Free implementation
|
No
|
||
|
Free support
|
No
|
Service
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
PTaaS
|
No
|
MPT and PTaaS
|
|
|
Reverse engineering
|
No
|
Yes | |
|
Secure code review
|
No
|
No information available
|
|
|
Pivoting
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Exploitation
|
No
|
Yes
|
|
|
Manual reattacks
|
Not applicable
|
1 reattack
|
|
|
Zero-day
vulnerabilities
|
None
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability research
|
Continuous zero-day vulnerability
research
|
|
SLA
|
Availability | ||
|
Minimum availability
|
>=99.95% per minute LTM
|
>=99% per month
|
|
|
After-sale guarantees
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
|
Accreditations
|
DevOps ISV Competency, Security ISV
Competency and Penetration Testing by CREST
|
||
|
Hacker certifications
|
Not applicable
|
54 from 25 different types
|
|
|
Type of contract
|
Employee
|
Same
|
Employee
|
|
Endpoint control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Channel control
|
Not applicable
|
Total
|
No information available
|
|
Standards
|
Some requirements from 67 standards, 27 in common and 40
additional
|
All requirements from the same standards
|
32 standards, 27 in common and 5
additional
|
|
Detection method
|
Automated tools, AI and human intelligence
|
Automated tools, AI and human
intelligence
|
|
|
False positives
|
36.03 times better
|
56.67 times better
|
1.64% F0.5 score per quantity
|
|
False negatives
|
64.59 times better
|
185.73 times better
|
0.41% F2.0 score per severity
|
|
Remediation
|
5, 3 in common and 2 additional
|
Same, plus 1
|
3, all in common
|
|
Outputs
|
5, 4 in common and 1
additional
|
Same, plus 2
|
5, 4 in common and 1 additional
|
Product
|
Attribute
|
Essential |
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
ASPM
|
Yes
|
||
|
API
|
REST with JSON and XML
|
||
|
IDE
|
5 functionalities, 3 in common and 2
additional
|
Same, plus 1 functionality
|
4 functionalities, 3 in common and 1
additional
|
|
CLI
|
Yes
|
||
|
CI/CD
|
Breaks the build
|
||
|
Vulnerability sources
|
4 sources, 1 in common and 3 additional
|
10 sources, 1 in common and 9
additional
|
|
|
Threat model alignment
|
No
|
||
|
Priority criteria
|
CVSS v3.0, EPSS and KEV
|
||
|
Custom prioritization
|
None | ||
|
Scanner origin
|
In-house and External (Grype for
Containers and Trivy for IaC and Secrets)
|
||
|
SCA
|
23 package managers, 13 in common and 10
additional
|
20 package managers, 13 in common and 7
additional
|
|
|
AI security
|
No
|
No
|
|
|
Reachability
|
12 languages
|
Yes. No information available
|
|
|
Reachability type
|
No information available
|
||
|
SBOM
|
22 package managers, 9 in common and 13
additional
|
18 package managers, 9 in common and 9
additional
|
|
| Malware detection |
Yes
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
|
Autofix on components
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Containers
|
4 distributions, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
5 distributions, 2 in common and 3
additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(languages)
|
12, 10 in common and 2
additional
|
25, 10 in common and 15 additional
|
|
|
Source SAST
(frameworks)
|
22, 4 in common and 18 additional
|
15, 4 in common and 11 additional
|
|
|
Custom rules
|
No
|
No
|
Custom rules for SCA
|
|
IaC
|
6, 5 in common and 1 additional
|
4, 2 in common and 2 additional
|
7, all in common
|
|
Binary SAST
|
1 type of binary in common
|
Same, plus 2 types of binaries
|
6 types of binaries, 1 in common and 5
additional
|
|
DAST
|
7 attack surface types, 5 in common and
2 additional
|
6 attack surface types (only web
based), 5 in common and 1 additional
|
|
|
API security testing
|
No
|
4 types of APIs, 1 in common and 3
additional
|
1 type of API in common
|
|
IAST
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
CSPM
|
Yes |
No
|
|
|
ASM
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
|
Secrets
|
15 secrets types, 5 in common and 11
additional
|
Same, plus verify other attack vectors
and secrets exploitability
|
5 secrets types, all in common
|
|
AI
|
3 functions, 1 in common and 2
additional
|
1 function in common
|
|
|
MCP
|
No
|
||
|
Open-source
|
Not applicable
|
No
|
|
| Provisioning as code |
No
|
||
|
Deployment
|
SaaS (no tenancy information)
|
||
| Regions |
EU and US
|
||
|
Status
|
Yes
|
||
|
Incidents
|
4.08 per year
|
Integrations
|
Attribute
|
Essential
|
Advanced
|
Veracode
|
|
SCM
|
6, 4 in common and 2 additional
|
4, all in common
|
|
|
Binary repositories
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Ticketing
|
3, all in common
|
7, 3 in common and 4 additional
|
|
|
ChatOps
|
None |
None
|
6 |
|
IDE
|
3, 2 in common and 1 additional
|
6, 2 in common and 4 additional
|
|
|
CI/CD
|
21, 10 in common and 11 additional
|
10, all in common
|
|
|
SCA
|
Native
|
||
|
Container
|
Native | ||
|
SAST
|
Native
|
||
|
DAST
|
Native
|
||
|
IAST
|
None |
None
|
None
|
|
Cloud
|
3, 1 in common and 2 additional
|
1 in common
|
|
|
CSPM
|
None | ||
|
Secrets
|
Native
|
||
|
Remediation
|
None
|
None
|
1 |
| Bug bounty |
None
|
None
|
None
|
|
Vulnerability management
|
None
|
None
|
6
|
|
Compliance
|
None
|
None
|
None
|
The latest update to this comparison was on Dec 16, 2025. The primary sources of information
were veracode.com and docs.veracode.com, which were supplemented by specialized
information-gathering sites, social media, and other sources.
Free trial
Search for vulnerabilities in your apps for free with Fluid Attacks' automated security testing! Start
your 21-day free trial and discover the
benefits of the Continuous
Hacking Essential plan. If you prefer the
Advanced plan, which includes the expertise of Fluid Attacks' hacking team, fill out this contact form.