Veracode vs Snyk
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 onlyFrom $25 per contributing developer/month (indicative, Team)
Free tierWhat drives the bill
The metric that actually scales your invoice.
Enterprise annual subscriptions priced by application count and scan types.
Priced per contributing developer. Enterprise agreements add reporting and governance and get expensive.
Free tier
No free tier.
Free plan with a monthly test allowance, generous enough for small projects.
Open source
Self-hostable
No-code authoring
Languages
Platforms
Fits teams
Adoption
Widely used
Veracode · since 2006
Category standard
Snyk · since 2015
Strengths
- 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.
- 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.
Limitations
- Slow feedback compared with developer-first tools — poor fit for per-commit scanning.
- Expensive per application.
- Developer experience lags Snyk and Semgrep considerably.
- 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.
Best for
Regulated enterprises needing formal security attestation, including for supplier software.
Engineering teams that want security findings arriving in the pull request with a fix attached.
All of these integrate with: Jenkins, GitHub, Jira, GitLab.
Pricing last reviewed August 2026 and is indicative only — confirm on each vendor’s own page.