We performed a comparison between Coverity and Synopsys API Security Testing based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Static Application Security Testing (SAST)."It's very stable."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"It's pretty stable. I rate the stability of Coverity nine out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of Coverity is the wrapper. We use the wrapper to build the C++ component, then we use the other code analysis to analyze the code to the build object, and then send back the result to the SonarQube server. Additionally, it is a powerful capabilities solution."
"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 solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"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 most valuable features of Synopsys API Security Testing are the metrics, results, and threat vectors that it shares."
"The product could be enhanced by providing video troubleshooting guides, making issue resolution more accessible. Troubleshooting without visual guides can be time-consuming."
"Coverity takes a lot of time to dereference null pointers."
"Ideally, it would have a user-based license that does not have a restriction in the number of lines of code."
"The reporting tool integration process is sometimes slow."
"Coverity is far from perfection, and I'm not 100 percent sure it's helping me find what I need to find in my role. We need exactly what we are looking for, i.e. security errors and vulnerabilities. It doesn't seem to be reporting while we are changing our code."
"The product lacks sufficient customization options."
"The quality of the code needs improvement."
"Sometimes, vulnerabilities remain unidentified even after setting up the rules."
"The solution required us to use our team and we spoke to Synopsys API Security Testing's support to do the implementation. We use two people from our team for the implementation. and one person for maintenance."
Earn 20 points
Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews while Synopsys API Security Testing is ranked 30th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST). Coverity is rated 7.8, while Synopsys API Security Testing is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Synopsys API Security Testing writes "Useful threat vectors, beneficial results, but implementation needed support". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode, whereas Synopsys API Security Testing is most compared with Seeker, Fortify WebInspect, OWASP Zap and Acunetix.
See our list of best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Static Application Security Testing (SAST) 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.
