We performed a comparison between Fortify on Demand and Klocwork based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Security Tools solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most important feature of the product is to follow today's technology fast, updated rules and algorithms (of the product)."
"The UL is easy to use compared to that of other tools, and it is highly reliable. The findings provide a lower number of false positives."
"The static code analyzers are the most valuable features of this solution."
"Provides good depth of scanning and we get good results."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"Fortify on Demand is easy to use and the reporting is good."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"t's a cloud-based solution, so there was no installation involved."
"One can increase the number of vendors, so the solution is scalable."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"It's integrated into our CI, continuous integration."
"The tool helps the team to think beforehand about corner cases or potential bugs that might arise in real-time."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"I like not having to dig through false positives. Chasing down a false positive can take anywhere from five minutes for a small easy one, then something that is complicated and goes through a whole bunch of different class cases, and it can take up to 45 minutes to an hour to find out if it is a false positive or not."
"Technical support is quite good."
"There is a central Klocwork server at our headquarter in France so we connect the client directly to the server on-premises remotely."
"If you have a continuous integration in place, for example, and you want it to run along with your build and you want it to be fast, you're not going to get it. It adds to your development time."
"They could provide features for artificial intelligence similar to other vendors."
"It natively supports only a few languages. They can include support for more native languages. The response time from the support team can also be improved. They can maybe include video tutorials explaining the remediation process. The remediation process is sometimes not that clear. It would be helpful to have videos. Sometimes, the solution that the tool gives in the GUI is not straightforward to understand for the developer. At present, for any such issues, you have to create a ticket for the support team and request help from the support team."
"Primarily for a complex, advanced website, they don't really understand some of the functionalities. So for instance, they could tell us that there is a vulnerability because somebody could possibly do something, but they don't really understand the code to realize that we actually negate that vulnerability through some other mechanism in the program. In addition, the technical support is just not there. We have open tickets. They don't respond. Even if they respond, we're not seeing eye to eye. As the company got sold and bought, the support got worse."
"They have very good support, but there is always room for improvement."
"They have a release coming out, which is full of new features. Based on their roadmap, there's nothing that I would suggest for them to put in it that they haven't already suggested. However, I am a customer, so I always think the pricing is something that could be improved. I am working with them on that, and they're very flexible. They work with their customers and kind of tailor the product to the customer's needs. So far, I am very happy with what they're able to provide. Their subscriptions could use a little bit of a reworking, but that would be about it."
"New technologies and DevOps could be improved. Fortify on Demand can be slow (slower than other vendors) to support new technologies or new software versions."
"There are lots of limitations with code technology. It cannot scan .net properly either."
"Modern languages, such as Angular and .NET, should be included as a part of Klocwork. They have recently added Kotlin as a part of their project, but we would like to see more languages in Klocwork. That's the reason we are using Coverity as a backup for some of the other languages."
"What needs improvement in Klocwork, compared to other products in the market, is the dashboard or reporting mechanisms that need to be a bit more flexible. The Klocwork dashboard could be improved. Though it's good, it's not as good as some of the other products in the market, which is a problem. The reporting could be more detailed and easier to sort out because sorting in Klocwork could be a bit more time-consuming, mainly when sorting defects based on filters, compared to how it's done on other tools such as Coverity."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"Now the only issue we have is that whenever we need to get the code we have to build it first. Then we can get the report."
"The way to define the rules is too complex. The definition/rules for static analysis could be automated according to various SILs, so as to avoid confusion."
"We bought Klocwork, but it was limited to one little program, but the program is now sort of failing. So, we have a license for usage on a program that is sort of failing, and we really can't use the license on anything else."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 10th in Application Security Tools with 57 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 16th in Application Security Tools with 20 reviews. Fortify on Demand is rated 8.0, while Klocwork is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortify on Demand writes "Provides good depth of scanning but is unfortunately not fully integrated with CIT processes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Klocwork writes "Their technical team helps us get the most out of the solution, but we've faced some stability problems in our environment". Fortify on Demand is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode, Checkmarx One, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, Checkmarx One and Snyk. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Static Application Security Testing (SAST) vendors.
We monitor all Application Security Tools 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.
