Compare Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender
Coverity is ranked 10th in Application Security with 5 reviews while Fortify Application Defender is ranked 17th in Application Security with 3 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.2, while Fortify Application Defender is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Coverity writes "Enables our entire company to publish the analysis results into our central space". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortify Application Defender writes "Static code analysis helps identify security issues and maintain compliance". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, whereas Fortify Application Defender is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity and CAST Application Intelligence Platform. See our Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender report.
Sponsored | ||
 |
Most Helpful Review | ||||||||
|
|
| ||||||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender and other solutions. Updated: February 2020. 407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||||||||
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | ||
We used it for performing security checks. We have many Java applications and Android applications. Essentially it was used for checking the security validations for compliance purposes. I have used this solution in multiple projects for vulnerability testing and finding security leaks within the code. The most valuable feature comes from the fact that it is cloud-based, and I can scale up without having to worry about any other infrastructure needs. We are using the Veracode tools to expose the engineers to the security vulnerabilities that were introduced with the new features, i.e. a lot faster or sooner in the development life cycle. One of the valuable features is that it gives us the option of static scanning. Most tools of this type are centered around dynamic scanning. Having a static scan is very important. It has an easy-to-use interface. Veracode provides faster scans compared to other static analysis security testing tools. It has almost completely eliminated the presence of SQLi vulnerabilities. | The features I find most valuable is that our entire company can publish the analysis results into our central space. The security analysis features are the most valuable features of this solution. The solution has helped to increase staff productivity and improved our work significantly by approximately 20 percent. It has the lowest false positives. | The most valuable feature is that it analyzes data in real-time. The solution helped us to improve the code quality of our organization. Its ability to find security defects is valuable. |
Cons | ||
One of the things that we have from a reporting point of view, is that we would love to see a graphical report. If you look through a report for something that has come back from Veracode, it takes a whole lot of time to just go through all the pages of the code to figure out exactly what it says. We know certain areas don’t have the greatest security features but those are usually minor and we don’t want to see those types of notifications. Ideally, I would like better reporting that gives me a more concise and accurate description of what my pain points are, and how to get to them. I would like to see expanded coverage for supporting more platforms, frameworks, and languages. Veracode should make it easier to navigate between the solutions that they offer, i.e. between dynamic, static, and the source code analysis. We would like a way to mark entire modules as "safe." The lack of this feature hasn't stopped us previously, it just makes our task more tedious at times. That kind of feature would save us time. Veracode scans provide a higher number of false positives. The overall reporting structure is complicated, and it's difficult to understand the report. It needs more timely support for newer languages and framework versions. | The setup takes very long. The quality of the code needs improvement. They could improve the usability. For example, how you set things up, even though it's straightforward, it could be still be easier. Reporting engine needs to be more robust. | The workbench is a little bit complex when you first start using it. The solution is quite expensive. Support for older compilers/IDEs is lacking. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | ||
They have just streamlined the licensing and they have a number of flexible options available, so overall it is quite good, albeit pricey. They just changed their pricing model two weeks ago. They went from a per-app license to a per-megabyte license. I know that the dynamic scan was $500 per app. Static analysis was about $4500 yearly. The license is only for the number of users, it doesn't matter what data you put in there. That was the old model. I do not know how the new model works. Veracode has been fair. We use their SaaS solution and it's just an annual subscription. No issues, the pricing seems reasonable. It is pricey. There is a lot of value in the product, but it is a costly tool. I recommend going for a one-year licensing with CA, because currently they are the leaders in this field with more features and a much better turn around time with a cheaper position, but there are a lot of new companies coming up in the market and they are building up their platforms. Costs are reasonable. No special infrastructure is required and the license model is good. I think the pricing is in line with the rest of the tools. I think you get what you pay for. It is certainly not inexpensive, but the value proposition is there. There are certainly cheaper tools, but I don't think we'd be getting the support that we get with those, and that is what separates this product from the others. | Information Not Available | Information Not Available |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security solutions are best for your needs. 407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012. | ||
Top Comparisons | ||
 Compared 50% of the time.  Compared 14% of the time.  Compared 10% of the time. | Compared 53% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time. Compared 8% of the time. | Compared 60% of the time.  Compared 16% of the time.  Compared 6% of the time. |
Also Known As | ||
| Synopsys Static Analysis | HPE Fortify Application Defender, Micro Focus Fortify Application Defender | |
Learn | ||
| Veracode Video Not Available | Synopsys | Micro Focus |
Overview  | ||
Veracode covers all your Application Security needs in one solution through a combination of five analysis types; static analysis, dynamic analysis, software composition analysis, interactive application security testing, and penetration testing. Unlike on-premise solutions that are hard to scale and focused on finding rather than fixing, Veracode comprises a unique combination of SaaS technology and on-demand expertise that enables DevSecOps through integration with your pipeline, and empowers developers to find and fix security defects. | Synopsys Static Analysis helps reduce risk and lower overall project cost by identifying critical quality defects and potential security vulnerabilities during development, with accurate and actionable remediation guidance, based on patented techniques and a decade of research and development and analysis of over 10 billion lines of proprietary and open source code. | Micro Focus Security Fortify Application Defender is a runtime application self-protection (RASP) solution that helps you manage and mitigate risk from homegrown or third-party applications. It provides centralized visibility into application use and abuse while protecting from software vulnerability exploits and other violations in real time. |
Offer | ||
Keep your software secure Application security starts with secure code. Find out more about the benefits of using Veracode to keep your software secure throughout the development lifecycle. | Learn more about Coverity | Learn more about Fortify Application Defender |
Sample Customers | ||
| State of Missouri, Rekner | Information Not Available | Information Not Available |
Top Industries | ||
Financial Services Firm31% Insurance Company15% Consumer Goods8% Healthcare Company8% Software R&D Company40% Comms Service Provider12% Financial Services Firm6% Media Company6% | Software R&D Company36% Comms Service Provider14% Manufacturing Company10% Retailer9% | Software R&D Company41% Comms Service Provider14% Financial Services Firm10% Insurance Company5% |
Company Size | ||
Small Business21% Midsize Enterprise25% Large Enterprise55% Small Business17% Midsize Enterprise9% Large Enterprise74% | Midsize Enterprise29% Large Enterprise71% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. Fortify Application Defender and other solutions. Updated: February 2020.
407,538 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also Coverity Reviews, Fortify Application Defender Reviews, and our list of Best Application Security Companies.
We monitor all Application Security 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.