We performed a comparison between Coverity and GitLab based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Testing (AST) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"It's very stable."
"It is a scalable solution."
"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 most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"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."
"The product has deeper scanning capabilities."
"Coverity gives advisory and deviation features, which are some of the parts I liked."
"I find the features and version control history to be most valuable for our development workflow. These aspects provide us with a clear view of changes and help us manage requests efficiently."
"The solution's service delivery model is fantastic."
"The most valuable features of Gitlab are integration with CIE and the ability to rapidly deploy solutions, projects, and applications. It is very easy to use, and there are no complaints."
"A user friendly solution."
"The dashboard and interface make it easy to use."
"I have found the most valuable feature is security control. I also like the branching and cloning software."
"GitLab's best features are maintenance, branch integration, and development infrastructure."
"It speeds up our development, it's faster, safer, and more convenient."
"The setup takes very long."
"We use GitHub and Gitflow, and Coverity does not fit with Gitflow. I have to create a screen for our branches, and it's a pain for developers. It has been difficult to integrate Coverity with our system."
"The solution's user interface and quality gate could be improved."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"Merge conflicts and repository maintenance could improve. If there is someone new to the system they would not know if there is a conflict."
"I would like to see security increased in the future. A secure environment is very important."
"It would be really good if they integrated more features in application security."
"We do face issues in our company when we run out of disk space."
"The solution should again offer an on-premises deployment option."
"Perhaps the integration could be better."
"For as long as I have used GitLab, I haven't encountered any major limitations. However, I think that perhaps the search functionality could be better."
"We'd like to see better integration with the Atlassian ecosystem."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews while GitLab is ranked 8th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 70 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while GitLab is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitLab writes "Powerful, mature, and easy to set up and manage". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Mend.io, whereas GitLab is most compared with Microsoft Azure DevOps, Bamboo, SonarQube, AWS CodePipeline and Tekton. See our Coverity vs. GitLab report.
See our list of best Application Security Testing (AST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
