We performed a comparison between CAST Highlight and Coverity 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."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."
"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."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"Coverity is easy to set up and has a less lengthy process to find vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution."
"The product has been beneficial in logging functionality, allowing me to categorize vulnerabilities based on severity. This aids in providing updated reports on subsequent scans."
"The reporting feature is up to the mark."
"This solution is easy to use."
"I encountered a bug with Coverity, and I opened a ticket. Support provided me with a workaround. So it's working at the moment, or at least it seems to be."
"The ease of configuration and customization could be improved in CAST Highlight."
"CAST Highlight could improve to allow us to comment and do a deep analysis by ourselves."
"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 reports that describe the issues of concern are rather abstract and the issues should be more clearly described to the user."
"There's a bit of a learning curve at the outset."
"The solution is a bit complex to use in comparison to other products that have many plugins."
"There should be additional IDE support."
"Coverity is not stable."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
"We'd like it to be faster."
"The setup takes very long."
"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 should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
CAST Highlight is ranked 13th in Software Composition Analysis (SCA) with 5 reviews while Coverity is ranked 4th in Static Application Security Testing (SAST) with 34 reviews. CAST Highlight is rated 7.8, while Coverity is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CAST Highlight writes "Easy to set up with optimized and automated insights". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". CAST Highlight is most compared with SonarQube, Snyk, Veracode and Black Duck, whereas Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Veracode. See our CAST Highlight vs. Coverity 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.