We performed a comparison between CAST Highlight and SonarQube 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."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."
"CAST Highlight is easy to use and has a good dashboard."
"It offers good performance."
"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."
"The most valuable features of CAST Highlight are automation and speed."
"One of the most valuable features of SonarQube is its ability to detect code quality during development. There are rules that define various technologies—Java, C#, Python, everything—and these rules declare the coding standards and code quality. With SonarQube, everything is detectable during the time of development and continuous integration, which is an advantage. SonarQube also has a Quality Gate, where the code should reach 85%. Below that, the code cannot be promoted to a further environment, it should be in a development environment only. So the checks are there, and SonarQube will provide that increase. It also provides suggestions on how the code can be fixed and methods of going about this, without allowing hackers to exploit the code. Another valuable feature is that it is tightly integrated with third-party tools. For example, we can see the SonarQube metrics in Bitbucket, the code repository. Once I raise the full request, the developer, team lead, or even the delivery lead can see the code quality metrics of the deliverable so that they can make a decision. SonarQube will also cover all of the top OWASP vulnerabilities, however it doesn't have penetration testing or hacker testing. We use other tools, like Checkmarx, to do penetration testing from the outside."
"The product itself has a friendly UI."
"The most valuable features are that it is user-friendly, easy to access, and they provide good training files."
"The most valuable feature of SonarQube I have found to be the configuration that has allowed us to can make adjusts to the demands of the code review. It gives a specified classification regarding the skill, prioritization, and it is easy for me to review and make my code."
"The solution is stable."
"The product is simple."
"If code coverage is a low number then that's of great value to me."
"SonarQube is one of the more popular solutions because it supports 29 languages."
"The reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"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 ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"We previously experienced issues with security but a segregated security violation has been implemented and the issues we experienced are being fixed."
"The scanning part could be improved in SonarQube. We have used Coverity for scanning, and we have the critical issues reported by Coverity. When we used SonarQube for scanning and looked at the results, it seems that some of them have incorrect input. This part can be improved for C and C++ languages."
"Monitoring is a feature that can be improved in the next version."
"A little bit more emphasis on security and a bit more security scanning features would be nice."
"SonarQube could be improved with more dynamic testing—basically, now, it's a static code analysis scan. For example, when the developer writes the code and does the corresponding unit test, he can cover functional and non-functional. So the SonarQube could be improved by helping to execute unit tests and test dynamically, using various parameters, and to help detect any vulnerabilities. Currently, it'll just give the test case and say whether it passes or fails—it won't give you any other input or dynamic testing. They could use artificial intelligence to build a feature that would help developers identify and fix issues in the early stages, which would help us deliver the product and reduce costs. Another area with room for improvement is in regard to automating things, since the process currently needs to be done manually."
"I would like to see dynamic code analysis in the next version of the software."
"We had some issues scanning the master branch but when we upgraded to version 7.9 we noticed it does scan the master branch but we had to do a workaround for it to happen. This process could be improved in a future release."
"You may need to purchase add-ons to get the useability you desire."
CAST Highlight is ranked 10th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 5 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 1st in Application Security Tools with 110 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.8, while SonarQube is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonarQube writes "Easy to integrate and has a plug-in that supports both C and C++ languages". CAST Highlight is most compared with Snyk, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Black Duck and GitLab, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Checkmarx One, SonarCloud, Coverity, Veracode and CodeSonar. See our CAST Highlight vs. SonarQube 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.
