We performed a comparison between Klocwork and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the Incremental analysis."
"The reporting helps us understand the trend of our results and whether we improve over time. We can see the history within Klocwork's server architecture and know that we're making things better. It creates a great story for our management. We can demonstrate value and how our software is developing over time."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"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."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"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."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"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."
"I believe it should support more languages, such as Python and JavaScript."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"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."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
Klocwork is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Klocwork is rated 8.2, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, CodeSonar, Checkmarx One and Veracode, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, CodeSonar, Parasoft SOAtest and GitLab. See our Klocwork vs. Polyspace Code Prover report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.