We performed a comparison between HCL AppScan and SonarCloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Static Application Security Testing (SAST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."You can easily find particular features and functions through the UI."
"The solution offers services in a few specific development languages."
"The UI was very intuitive."
"For me, as a manager, it was the ease of use. Inserting security into the development process is not normally an easy project to do. The ability for the developer to actually use it and get results and focuses, that's what counted."
"It was easy to set up."
"We leverage it as a quality check against code."
"The most valuable feature of HCL AppScan is its integration with the SDLC, particularly during the coding phase."
"Technical support is helpful."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"The most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"The solution provides continuous code analysis which has improved the quality of our code. It can raise alarms on vulnerabilities with immediate reports on the dashboard. Few things are false positives and we can customize the rules."
"The reports from SonarCloud are very good."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"The most valuable features of SonarCloud are the ability to discover vulnerabilities, security weak points, security hotspots, and all the feedback that comes into the feature branch. You can deploy the code with the security, you can eliminate the problem at the developer level rather than identifying the problem in the productions."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"IBM Security AppScan Source is rather hard to use."
"In future releases, I would like to see more aggressive reports. I would also like to see less false positives."
"IBM Security AppScan needs to add performance optimization for quickly scanning the target web applications."
"I would like to see the roadmap for this product. We are still waiting to see it as we have only so many resources."
"The tool should improve its output. Scanning is not a challenge anymore since there are many such tools available in the market. The product needs to focus on how its output is being used by end users. It should be also more user-friendly. One of the major challenges is in the tool's integration with applications that need to be scanned. Sometimes, the scanning is not proper."
"They should have a better UI for dashboards."
"The penetration testing feature should be included."
"Improving usability could enhance the overall experience with AppScan. It would be beneficial to make the solution more user-friendly, ensuring that everyone can easily navigate and utilize its features."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"The reports could improve by providing more information. We are not able to use the reports in our operation until they are improved. Additionally, if the vendor provided more customization capabilities it would be a benefit."
"CI/CD pipeline is part of a whole chain of design, development, and production, and it's becoming increasingly crucial to optimize the various tools across different stages. However, it's still a silo approach because the full integration is missing. This isn't just an issue with SonarCloud. It's a general problem with tooling."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"SonarCloud can improve the false positives. Sometimes the gates sometimes act a little weird. We then need to manually go and mark the false positive."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"SonarCloud's UI needs enhancement."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
HCL AppScan is ranked 11th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 41 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. HCL AppScan is rated 7.8, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of HCL AppScan writes " A stable and scalable product useful for application security scanning". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". HCL AppScan is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Acunetix, PortSwigger Burp Suite Professional and OWASP Zap, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and OWASP Zap. See our HCL AppScan vs. SonarCloud report.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
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.