We performed a comparison between Coverity and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is its software security feature called the Checker. If you share some vulnerability or weakness then the software can find any potential security bug or defect. The code integration tool enables some secure coding standards and implements some Checkers for Live Duo. So we can enable secure coding and Azure in this tool. So in our software, we can make sure our software combines some industry supervised data."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Coverity is scalable."
"The outputs are very reliable."
"Polyspace Code Prover has made me realize it differs from other static code analysis tools because it runs the code. So it's quite distinct in that aspect."
"When we work on safety modules, it is mandatory to fulfill ISO 26262 compliance. Using Prover helps fulfill the standard on top of many other quality checks, like division by zero, data type casts, and null pointer dereferences."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"The tool has some stability issues."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Polaris Software Integrity Platform, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, CodeSonar, Parasoft SOAtest and GitLab.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
