We performed a comparison between CodeSonar and Coverity based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Sonar, Veracode, Checkmarx and others in Application Security Tools."What I like best about CodeSonar is that it has fantastic speed, analysis and configuration times. Its detection of all runtime errors is also very good, though there were times it missed a few. The configuration of logs by CodeSonar is also very fantastic which I've not seen anywhere else. I also like the GUI interface of CodeSonar because it's very user friendly and the tool also shows very precise logs and results."
"The most valuable feature of CodeSonar is the catching of dead code. It is helpful."
"CodeSonar’s most valuable feature is finding security threats."
"It has been able to scale."
"The most valuable features of CodeSonar were all the categorized classes provided, and reports of future bugs which might occur in the production code. Additionally, I found the buffer overflow and underflow useful."
"There is nice functionality for code surfing and browsing."
"The tool is very good for detecting memory leaks."
"It has the lowest false positives."
"Provides software security, and helps to find potential security bugs or defects."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature of Coverity is that it shows examples of what is actually wrong with the code."
"The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space."
"The most valuable feature is the integration with Jenkins."
"The solution effectively identifies bugs in code."
"CodeSonar could improve by having better coding rules so we did not have to use another solution, such as MISRA C."
"It would be beneficial for the solution to include code standards and additional functionality for security."
"In a future release, the solution should upgrade itself to the current trends and differentiate between the languages. If there are any classifications that can be set for these programming languages that would be helpful rather than having everything in the generic category."
"In terms of areas for improvement, the use case for CodeSonar was good, but compared to other tools, it seems CodeSonar isn't a sound static analysis tool, and this is a major con I've seen from it. Right now, in the market, people prefer sound static analysis tools, so I would have preferred if CodeSonar was developed into a sound static analysis tool formally, in terms of its algorithms, so then you can see it extensively used in the market because at the moment, here in India, only fifty to sixty customers use CodeSonar. If the product is developed into a sound static analysis tool, it could compete with Polyspace, and from its current fifty customers, that number could go up to a hundred."
"The scanning tool for core architecture could be improved."
"There could be a shared licensing model for the users."
"It was expensive."
"They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier."
"Some features are not performing well, like duplicate detection and switch case situations."
"When I put my code into Coverity for scanning, the code information of the product is in the system. The solution could be improved by providing a SBOM, a software bill of material."
"The product should include more customization options. The analytics is not as deep as compared to SonarQube."
"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."
"Sometimes it's a bit hard to figure out how to use the product’s UI."
"The tool needs to improve its reporting."
"Reporting engine needs to be more robust."
CodeSonar is ranked 22nd in Application Security Tools with 7 reviews while Coverity is ranked 4th in Application Security Testing (AST) with 33 reviews. CodeSonar is rated 8.2, while Coverity is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of CodeSonar writes "Nice interface, quick to deploy, and easy to expand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Coverity writes "Best SAST tool to check software quality issues". CodeSonar is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Polyspace Code Prover, Semgrep Code and Fortify Static Code Analyzer, whereas Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Klocwork, Fortify on Demand, Checkmarx One and Parasoft SOAtest.
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.
