We performed a comparison between CAST Highlight and Coverity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Composition Analysis (SCA) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"The most valuable features of the CAST Highlight are the interface and there are three notations that are very simple to understand and communicate with."
"The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."
"The way it tells you which codebase is more ready for the cloud and which codebase is less ready is very valuable. It works seamlessly with most languages."
"It offers good performance."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"I like Coverity's capability to scan codes once we push it. We don't need more time to review our colleagues' codes. Its UI is pretty straightforward."
"It provides reports about a lot of potential defects."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"The ability to scan code gives us details of existing and potential vulnerabilities. What really matters for us is to ensure that we are able to catch vulnerabilities ahead of time."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"Its price should be better. It is a pretty costly tool. They have two products: CAST Highlight and CAST AIP. I would expect CAST Highlight to have the Help dashboard and the Engineering dashboard. These dashboards are currently a part of CAST AIP, and if these are made available in CAST Highlight, customers won't have to use two different products all the time."
"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"Coverity is not stable."
"It should be easier to specify your own validation routines and sanitation routines."
"SCM integration is very poor in Coverity."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"The setup takes very long."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."
CAST Highlight is ranked 10th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 5 reviews while Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.8, while Coverity is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". CAST Highlight is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode and Checkmarx One, whereas Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode. See our CAST Highlight vs. Coverity report.
We monitor all Software Composition Analysis (SCA) 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.