Mend.io vs Veracode
Feature checklists rarely decide anything. What decides it is the pricing metric, who has to write the tests, and which limitation you can live with.
Entry price
Quote on request
Quote onlyQuote on request
Quote onlyWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Quote-based enterprise pricing, typically per developer or per application.
Enterprise annual subscriptions priced by application count and scan types.
Free tier
Free tier for small teams on Mend's developer products.
No free tier.
Open source
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Widely used
Mend.io · since 2011
Widely used
Veracode · since 2006
Strengths
- Licence compliance reporting is the strongest in the category and often the reason legal approves a release.
- Reachability analysis reduces the transitive-dependency alert flood.
- Automated remediation pull requests.
- Binary scanning works on third-party and supplier software where source is unavailable.
- Policy engine and attestation reports satisfy regulated procurement directly.
- Managed service model suits organisations without a security engineering team.
Limitations
- SAST is weaker than dedicated code-analysis vendors.
- Enterprise pricing and sales process.
- Interface is dated in places.
- Slow feedback compared with developer-first tools — poor fit for per-commit scanning.
- Expensive per application.
- Developer experience lags Snyk and Semgrep considerably.
Best for
Enterprises where open-source licence compliance is as important as vulnerability management.
Regulated enterprises needing formal security attestation, including for supplier software.
All of these integrate with: GitHub, GitLab, Azure DevOps, Jenkins, Jira.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.