Dynamic application security testing · November 2026 Edition
StackHawk vs Veracode DAST
Three of fourteen models named StackHawk first on the direct prompt; zero named Veracode DAST. StackHawk was named by fourteen of the fourteen models and Veracode DAST by nine and StackHawk carries 41 labels and Veracode DAST 17, so the shares are not directly comparable.
Named in three categories this edition.
Named in one category this edition.
First-choice share11%2%Of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts, 0 to 100.
Negative rate2%24%Negative labels as a share of the product's labels, 0 to 100.
Rank in category#4#8A position in a field of 13; printed, not drawn.
Labels4117A count; the two differ.
The two percentage rows are drawn on one 0 to 100 track, StackHawk reading right to left. Rank and label count are printed, not drawn.Invicti was named alongside these two in twelve of the fourteen direct answers. Invicti vs StackHawk · Invicti vs Veracode DAST · OWASP ZAP vs StackHawk
Share is the count of first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts over all fourteen models, for a mid-market B2B company; rank is within the category; every quote names the model and the prompt it came from. Both figures come from the dynamic application security testing page.
By framing
How many of the fourteen models made each the first choice, per way of asking, and how many argued against it.
StackHawkFirst choices, of fourteen modelsVeracode DAST
Direct302 against Veracode DAST
Paraphrase21
Comparative00
Budget-constrained001 against Veracode DAST
Scale-constrained101 against Veracode DAST
Negative001 against StackHawk
Bars are first choices, 0 to 14 each sideModels that argued againstA model can name both, so the two sides of a row do not sum to fourteen.
Every model, every framing
The eighty-four answers behind the chart above, one cell each: where StackHawk and Veracode DAST stood in it.
| Model | Direct | Paraphrase | Comparative | Budget-constrained | Scale-constrained | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Haiku 4.5 | | | ||||
| GPT-5.4 mini | | | | |||
| Gemini 3.5 Flash | | | | | ||
| Perplexity Sonar | | | | | ||
| Grok 4.20 | | | | | ||
| Mistral Small | | |||||
| DeepSeek V4 Flash | | | | | | |
| Llama 4 Maverick | | | ||||
| Qwen 3.7 Flash | | | ||||
| Kimi K2 | | | | |||
| GLM 4.7 FlashX | | | | |||
| MiniMax M2.5 | | |||||
| GPT-6 Luna | | | ||||
| Muse Glimmer 30B | | |
StackHawk Veracode DAST first choice named as an alternative argued againstblank: not namedEach cell is one answer, StackHawk on the left and Veracode DAST on the right.The direct prompt
The plain question, one answer per model, grouped by where StackHawk and Veracode DAST stood in it.
StackHawk first, Veracode DAST not the choice
3 of 14 modelsVeracode DAST was named in the answer but not as the choice, or not at all.GPT-5.4 miniStackHawk alternatives: Burp Suite, Invicti
Gemini 3.5 FlashStackHawk alternatives: Acunetix, Bright Security, Escape, Invicti
GPT-6 LunaStackHawk alternatives: Burp Suite DAST, Invicti
Neither was the first choice, one was named
9 of 14 modelsThe answer put something else first and named one of the two as an alternative.Claude Haiku 4.5Invicti alternatives: Acunetix, Bright Security, StackHawk
Perplexity SonarInvicti alternatives: Bright Security, Escape, StackHawk
Grok 4.20Invicti alternatives: Escape, Intruder, Probely, StackHawk
Mistral SmallAcunetix, Invicti alternatives: OWASP ZAP, StackHawk
DeepSeek V4 FlashAcunetix alternatives: Invicti, OWASP ZAP, StackHawk
Llama 4 MaverickInvicti alternatives: Burp Suite, OWASP ZAP, StackHawk
Qwen 3.7 FlashInvicti alternatives: Acunetix, Apidog, Postman, Veracode DAST
GLM 4.7 FlashXOWASP ZAP, Probely alternatives: Burp Suite, Invicti, StackHawk
Muse Glimmer 30BInvicti alternatives: Acunetix, StackHawk
Neither was named
2 of 14 modelsThe answer made no first choice from these two in this category.Kimi K2Acunetix, Intruder alternatives: Bright Security, Detectify
MiniMax M2.5Acunetix, Bright Security alternatives: Detectify, Intruder
Bold names in an answer are the products the judge labeled a first choice; a model naming several gives each of them that label. The full answer text for every row is in the record.
By buyer segment
The same question asked on behalf of a different buyer. Each standing is computed within its segment and they are never added together. The figures above are the mid-market standing, which is the one the category orders by.
Small business
StackHawk leads by thirteen points.
StackHawk13%#3 of 13Veracode DAST0%#– of 13Mid-marketThe figures above
StackHawk leads by nine points.
StackHawk11%#4 of 13Veracode DAST2%#8 of 13Enterprise
The order flips: Veracode DAST leads at enterprise.
Veracode DAST2%#9 of 14StackHawk0%#12 of 14What the models said about StackHawk
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Four of five in this category shown.
“its own docs acknowledge that scan results can include false positives, so findings still need review and confirmation” GPT-5.4 mini · negative prompt · soft negative
“Modern mid-market / DevSecOps native | StackHawk, Escape, Bright (NeuraLegion)” Kimi K2 · scale prompt · first choice
“the best DAST tool is usually StackHawk if your team is developer-driven” GPT-5.4 mini · direct prompt · first choice
“StackHawk — Best for Developer-Centric & Modern API-First B2B SaaS” Gemini 3.5 Flash · paraphrase prompt · first choice
What the models said about Veracode DAST
Every negative label with a quote, up to three, then the highest-weighted positives, up to three. Six of eight in this category shown.
“Avoid pure enterprise tools like full Checkmarx or Veracode unless you have dedicated budget.” Grok 4.20 · direct prompt · hard negative
“Avoid for Mid-Market: Heavy legacy enterprise suites (e.g., Veracode DAST, HCL AppScan)” Gemini 3.5 Flash · direct prompt · hard negative
“Enterprise DAST platforms (like Veracode, Rapid7 InsightAppSec, or Fortify) often cost tens of thousands of dollars per year.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · budget prompt · soft negative
“The recommended dynamic web application security scanners for a mid-sized B2B company are: 1. Veracode Dynamic Analysis” Llama 4 Maverick · paraphrase prompt · first choice
“Veracode/Checkmarx offer robust authentication handling, DOM-rendering crawlers, and managed false-positive controls.” Gemini 3.5 Flash · negative prompt · alternative
“Indusface WAS, Detectify, SOOS DAST, Veracode Dynamic Analysis, Checkmarx DAST” Grok 4.20 · negative prompt · alternative
Also compared
Invicti vs StackHawkInvicti vs Veracode DASTOWASP ZAP vs StackHawkOWASP ZAP vs Veracode DASTAcunetix vs StackHawkAcunetix vs Veracode DASTStackHawk vs Bright SecurityStackHawk vs EscapeStackHawk vs ProbelyBright Security vs Veracode DASTEscape vs Veracode DASTProbely vs Veracode DASTAll twenty-eight head-to-head pages and the full DAST standing
Comparisons are drawn for the top eight products in each category, each against each. The output is the models' output; nothing here is a recommendation by the index.