We performed a comparison between Coverity and Polyspace Code Prover based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Testing (AST)."The interface of Coverity is quite good, and it is also easy to use."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"We were very comfortable with the initial setup."
"One of the most valuable features is Contributing Events. That particular feature helps the developer understand the root cause of a defect. So you can locate the starting point of the defect and figure out exactly how it is being exploited."
"The app analysis is the most valuable feature as I know other solutions don't have that."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"The most valuable feature is that there were not a whole lot of false positives, at least on the codebases that I looked at."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"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."
"Polyspace Code Prover is a very user-friendly tool."
"The product detects memory corruptions."
"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."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"I would like to see integration with popular IDEs, such as Eclipse."
"The solution could use more rules."
"Right now, the Coverity executable is around 1.2GB to download. If they can reduce it to approximately 600 or 700MB, that would be great. If they decrease the executable, it will be much easier to work in an environment like Docker."
"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."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."
"I'd like the data to be taken from any format."
"The tool has some stability issues."
"Automation could be a challenge."
"One of the main disadvantages is the time it takes to initiate the first run."
"Using Code Prover on large applications crashes sometimes."
Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews while Polyspace Code Prover is ranked 23rd in Application Security Tools with 5 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.8, while Polyspace Code Prover is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Polyspace Code Prover writes "A stable solution for developing software components". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Polaris Software Integrity Platform, whereas Polyspace Code Prover is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, CodeSonar, Parasoft SOAtest and GitLab.
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.
