Snyk 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
From $25 per contributing developer/month (indicative, Team)
Free tierQuote on request
Quote onlyWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Priced per contributing developer. Enterprise agreements add reporting and governance and get expensive.
Enterprise annual subscriptions priced by application count and scan types.
Free tier
Free plan with a monthly test allowance, generous enough for small projects.
No free tier.
Open source
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Category standard
Snyk · since 2015
Widely used
Veracode · since 2006
Strengths
- Reachability analysis dramatically cuts the noise from transitive dependency alerts.
- Automated fix pull requests make remediation a merge rather than a project.
- One vendor covers dependencies, code, containers and IaC.
- 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
- Per-developer pricing scales uncomfortably in large engineering organisations.
- SAST is less deep than dedicated code-analysis vendors.
- Still produces substantial alert volume on older codebases.
- 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
Engineering teams that want security findings arriving in the pull request with a fix attached.
Regulated enterprises needing formal security attestation, including for supplier software.
All of these integrate with: GitHub, GitLab, Jenkins, Jira.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.