Softwr

Cybersecurity · head to head

Syft vs Veracode

Syft logo

Syft

Cybersecurity

Generates a software bill of materials from images, filesystems and archives

From
Free
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Veracode logo

Veracode

Cybersecurity

Application risk management platform for finding and fixing software vulnerabilities.

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Only Syft has a free tier, so it costs nothing to try first.
  • Each has a real cost: Syft lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.; Veracode no public pricing; customers must request a demo and custom quote.
  • They diverge on capability: Syft covers Multi-format output, Veracode covers Static analysis (SAST).
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Syft and Veracode actually diverge.

Attributes where Syft and Veracode differ
AttributeSyftVeracode
Starting priceFreeOn request
Pricing modelOpen source, no licence feequote
Free tierYesNo
PlatformsmacOS, Linux, Windows, Dockerweb, api

Identical on both: user rating (Not yet rated), category (Cybersecurity).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Syft

  • Multi-format output
  • Broad ecosystem coverage
  • Binary classifiers
  • In-toto attestations
  • Library and CLI
  • Pairs with Grype

Only in Veracode

  • Static analysis (SAST)
  • Dynamic analysis (DAST)
  • Software composition analysis
  • AI-driven code remediation
  • Container security
  • Risk Manager (ASPM)

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Syft

  • Producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires onenot Veracode
  • Feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directlynot Veracode
  • Recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quicklynot Veracode
  • Public sector work where an SBOM is a contractual deliverablenot Veracode

Veracode

  • Scanning applications for vulnerabilities across the SDLCnot Syft
  • Automating remediation of flagged security flaws with AInot Syft
  • Securing containerized workloads before deploymentnot Syft
  • Running penetration tests as a managed servicenot Syft
  • Enforcing security policy governance across many applicationsnot Syft

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Syft

  • Lockfile parsing can drop packages silently. An open issue filed in August 2026 reports the yarn v1 cataloguer returning 118 of 745 packages with no error raised, which means a complete bill of materials and an 84 percent incomplete one look identical to the caller.
  • Fidelity varies sharply by ecosystem. Conan for C and C++, Haskell and Terraform get cataloguer support with no licence data, no dependency relationships and no file ownership, so a C and C++ shop gets the least from it.
  • Binary classification yields no licence or dependency metadata, and vendored or statically linked code is exactly where supply chain risk hides, so the blind spot and the risk overlap.
  • Incorrect CPE values and CPE collisions are recorded as open issues, and since Grype matches on CPE and PURL, an inventory error becomes a false negative in the security report downstream.
  • An inventory is not a risk assessment. Even a perfect bill of materials says a vulnerable version is present, never that the vulnerable function is called, and the triage burden lands entirely on the reader.

Veracode

  • No public pricing; customers must request a demo and custom quote.
  • Full platform capability spans many modules, which can require significant onboarding.
  • Package Firewall and PTaaS are separate add-ons rather than included by default.
  • Primarily built for enterprise scale, less suited to small individual projects.

Pricing, plan by plan

Syft

Free
  • SyftFree
    • Apache-2.0
    • No usage limits
    • Community support
  • Anchore Enterprise$undefined/year
    • Policy enforcement and reporting
    • Federal and commercial tiers
    • Pricing not published, quoted on request

Veracode

On request

No published plan breakdown. See the Veracode review.

Which should you pick?

Choose Syft if

  • You need multi-format output.
  • You want to start without paying.
  • You work on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker.
  • You also want broad ecosystem coverage.
Syft review

Choose Veracode if

  • You need static analysis (sast).
  • You work on web, api.
  • You also want dynamic analysis (dast).
Veracode review

Questions people ask

Is Syft or Veracode better?
Neither clearly leads. Syft starts at Free and Veracode at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Syft or Veracode?
Syft has a free tier; the other does not. Paid plans start at Free for Syft and On request for Veracode.
Does Syft or Veracode run on more platforms?
Syft runs on macOS, Linux, Windows, Docker. Veracode runs on web, api.
Can I use Syft for free?
Yes. Syft has a free tier, so you can try it without paying. Veracode starts at On request.
What is Syft best used for?
Syft is most often used for producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires one, feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directly, recording what shipped in a build so a future disclosure can be answered quickly, public sector work where an sbom is a contractual deliverable. Of those, producing a bill of materials for a customer or regulator that requires one and feeding an inventory into a vulnerability scanner rather than scanning images directly are not what Veracode is typically brought in for.
What can Syft do that Veracode cannot?
Syft covers Multi-format output, Broad ecosystem coverage, Binary classifiers, In-toto attestations. Veracode covers Static analysis (SAST), Dynamic analysis (DAST), Software composition analysis, AI-driven code remediation.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Syft: Does Syft find vulnerabilities?

No. It produces an inventory. Grype, from the same company, matches that inventory against vulnerability feeds. They are separate tools and the distinction is frequently lost.

Veracode: How does Veracode pricing work?

Veracode does not publish pricing on their website. Organizations must request a personalized demo or contact sales to receive quotes tailored to their specific needs and usage volume.

Source
Syft: Does anything in the Anchore stack do reachability analysis?

No. Neither Syft, Grype nor the commercial Anchore platform performs call graph or reachability analysis, so none of them tells you whether a vulnerable code path is actually invoked.

Veracode: Does Veracode offer a free trial or free version?

No information about free trials or free versions is provided on Veracode's public website. Organizations must contact sales to discuss trial options.

Source
Syft: Is it a CNCF or OpenSSF project?

No. It is single-vendor open source owned by Anchore, with no foundation governance. That is a different licence risk profile from Sigstore.

Syft: What does Anchore Enterprise cost?

Not published. The pricing page is contact-sales only, with named but unpriced commercial and federal tiers.

Syft: How do I know my SBOM is complete?

You largely cannot, which is the honest answer. Silent partial parsing is a known open defect, so a bill of materials used for compliance should be spot-checked against a known dependency list.

Share

Related pages

More on Syft

More on Veracode

Keep looking

Other head to heads