We performed a comparison between Coverity 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."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."
"Coverity is quite stable and we haven’t had any issues or any downtime."
"The solution has improved our code quality and security very well."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"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."
"I'm not implementing the solutions. However, I've talked to the people who deploy the tools, and they are happy with how easy setting up SonarCloud is."
"For what it is meant to do, it works pretty well."
"The solution can be installed locally."
"Its dashboard provides a unified view of various code quality metrics, including code duplication, unit test coverage, and security hotspots."
"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 most valuable feature of SonarCloud is its overall performance."
"Recently, they introduced support for mono reports and microservices, which is a noteworthy development as it provides a more detailed view of each service."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"The solution could use more rules."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"Coverity could improve the ease of use. Sometimes things become difficult and you need to follow the guides from the website but the guides could be better."
"It would be helpful if notifications could go out to an extra person."
"The solution needs to improve its customization and flexibility."
"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."
"I've been told by the developers that the solution is too limited. It's not testing enough within the containers."
"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."
"We had some issues with the scanner."
"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."
"There's room for improvement in the configuration process, particularly during the initial setup phase."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews while SonarCloud is ranked 10th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 10 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while SonarCloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarCloud writes "Beneficial vulnerability discovery, simple to maintain, and proactive support". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Seeker, whereas SonarCloud is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, GitLab and Fortify on Demand. See our Coverity 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.