CodeQL vs Veracode

From $30 per committer/month (GitHub Advanced Security, indicative)

Quote on request

Free on public repos. Private repositories require GitHub Advanced Security, priced per active committer.

Enterprise annual subscriptions priced by application count and scan types.

Free for public repositories on GitHub.

No free tier.

Widely used

GitHub (Microsoft) · since 2019

Widely used

Veracode · since 2006

• Interprocedural dataflow analysis finds real vulnerabilities that regex- and pattern-based tools cannot see.
• Free on public repositories, with results in the GitHub security tab.
• Custom queries let you encode organisation-specific security rules.

• 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.

• Writing custom CodeQL queries is a specialist skill with a steep learning curve.
• Analysis is slow — minutes to tens of minutes, so it fits nightly better than per-commit.
• Private-repo licensing through Advanced Security is expensive at scale.

• Slow feedback compared with developer-first tools — poor fit for per-commit scanning.
• Expensive per application.
• Developer experience lags Snyk and Semgrep considerably.

GitHub-hosted projects wanting deep static security analysis, free if the repo is public.

Regulated enterprises needing formal security attestation, including for supplier software.