We performed a comparison between Coverity and Klocwork based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Result: Based on the parameters we compared, Klocwork comes out ahead of Coverity. Although both products have valuable features and can be estimated as high-end solutions, our reviewers found that Coverity is expensive and its support has a slow response time.
"The interface of Coverity is quite good, and it is also easy to use."
"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."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"Klocwork's most valuable feature is the static code analysis feature. It detects the potential problem earlier to allow the developer to receive feedback quickly and then address it before it becomes a problem."
"Technical support is quite good."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"We actually specified several checkers, but we found some checkers had a higher false positive rate. I think this is a problem. Because we have to waste some time is really the issue because the issue is not an issue. I mean, the tool pauses or an issue, but the same issue is the filter now.Some check checkers cannot find some issues, but sometimes they find issues that are not relevant, right, that are not really issues. Some customisation mechanism can be added in the next release so that we can define our Checker. The Modelling feature provided by Coverity helps in finding more information for potential issues but it is not mature enough, it should be mature. The fast testing feature for security testing campaign can be added as well. So if you correctly integrate it with the training team, maybe you can help us to find more potential issues."
"The level of vulnerability that this solution covers could be improved compared to other open source tools."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"Under NIST cybersecurity standards, we must address vulnerabilities within a specified time after discovering them. When we try to propagate those updates and fixes through the system, it would be nice if the clients could reconnect to the existing server or have the server dynamically updated in some way. I know that isn't easy, but maybe processes could be enhanced to make that more streamlined from a DevOps perspective."
"We'd like to see integration with Agile DevOps and Agile methodologies."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
"Modern languages, such as Angular and .NET, should be included as a part of Klocwork. They have recently added Kotlin as a part of their project, but we would like to see more languages in Klocwork. That's the reason we are using Coverity as a backup for some of the other languages."
"The main problem is that since it only parses the code, the warnings or the problems that are given as a result of the report can sometimes require a lot of effort to analyze."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 33 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 11th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 20 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One, Veracode and Polyspace Code Prover, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar, Checkmarx One and Veracode. See our Coverity vs. Klocwork 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.
