PhantomYerra vs Veracode - enterprise SAST compared, honestly

Dimension by dimension

Side by side

Every PhantomYerra cell is verifiable against the v51.2.0 source tree.

Dimension	PhantomYerra	Veracode
Rule transparency + count	24,476, source-verifiable	Proprietary, undisclosed
C / C++ depth	10,318 native rules	Partial
Native MISRA / CERT / AUTOSAR	Yes - 340+ MISRA + CERT	Partial
Languages (deep engines)	16	~25 (breadth)
AI / LLM security rules	1,770	None
Zero-day discovery suite	Yes - 7 engines	No
Cross-file interprocedural taint	Yes - YerraIntelliTrace	Yes
SCA / SBOM	Yes (SPDX + CycloneDX)	Yes
IaC / cloud / container / mobile	Yes - dedicated engines	Partial
AI FP-triage + autofix + fix-family reports	Yes	No
Offline / air-gapped	Yes - pure-Python	Cloud platform
Binary-only SAST (no source)	RE/binary engine (not SAST rules)	Killer feature

Transparent, source-verifiable rules - 24,476 of them, counted in the open; no black-box rule set.
Deep C/C++ + native MISRA C:2023 / C++:2023 + CERT - 10,318 C/C++ rules vs Veracode's partial coverage.
1,770 AI/LLM security rules and a 7-engine zero-day discovery suite - Veracode ships neither.
Offline, air-gapped, pure-Python - runs fully on-host; nothing uploaded to a cloud platform.
AI FP-triage + autofix + fix-family reports with worked vulnerable→fixed examples.

Binary-only SAST - scanning compiled JARs / WARs / DLLs with no source. PhantomYerra is source-first; our RE engine analyses binaries but not yet with the full SAST rule set against bytecode.
Raw language breadth - Veracode's catalog spans more total languages, though often shallower per language.
Long-tenured enterprise program management - policy/attestation workflow built over many years.

Every "Yes" above is verifiable against the v51.2.0 source tree; rule counts are produced by re.findall over the scanner files, not estimated.

If you have source - and want deep C/C++, native compliance, AI/LLM coverage and zero-day discovery offline - run PhantomYerra and compare.