Compare Coverity vs. SonarQube

Coverity is ranked 11th in Application Security with 5 reviews while SonarQube is ranked 2nd in Application Security with 14 reviews. Coverity is rated 7.2, while SonarQube is rated 7.4. 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 SonarQube writes "Great birds-eye view dashboard with detailed code metrics in the drill-down". Coverity is most compared with SonarQube, Veracode and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand, whereas SonarQube is most compared with Veracode, Checkmarx and Micro Focus Fortify on Demand. See our Coverity vs. SonarQube report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Veracode Logo
52,113 views|27,753 comparisons
Coverity Logo
14,756 views|11,812 comparisons
SonarQube Logo
64,186 views|53,713 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
383,725 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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

The most valuable features are the dashboard reports and the ease of integrating it with Jenkins.Strong code evaluation for budget-minded clients.If code coverage is a low number then that's of great value to me.SonarQube is good for checking and maintaining code quality.Using SonarQube has helped us to identify areas of technical debt to work on, resulting in better code, fewer vulnerabilities, and fewer bugs.We advise all of our developers to have this solution in place.If you want to have your code scanned and timed then this is a good tool.We have the software metrics that SonarQube gives us, which is something we did not have before. This helps us work towards aiming coding standards to empower us to move in the direction of better code quality. SonarQube provides targets and metrics for that.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

Although it has Sonar built into it, it is still lacking. Customization features of identifying a particular attack still need to be worked on. To give you an example: if we want to scan and do a false positive analysis, those types of features are missing. If we want to rescan something from a particular point that is a feature that is also missing. It’s in our queue. That will hopefully save a lot of time.Expression of common vulnerabilities and exposures is not always current.I don't believe you can have metrics of code quality based upon code analysis. I don't think it's possible for a computer to do it.I would like to see more options for security, beyond the basics like SQL injection.The solution is a bit lacking on the security side, in terms of finding and identifying vulnerabilities.I would like to see dynamic code analysis in the next version of the software.The reporting is good, but I am not able to download a specific report as a PDF, so downloading reports is something that should be looked at.We've been using the Community Edition, which means that we get to use it at our leisure, and they're kind enough to literally give it to us. However, it takes a fair amount of effort to figure out how to get everything up and running. Since we didn't go with the professional paid version, we're not entitled to support. Of course that could be self-correcting if we were to make the step to buy into this and really use it. Then their technical support would be available to us to make strides for using it better.

Read more »

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.

Read more »

Information Not Available
A low cost long-term solution for non-critical situations.We are using the free, unlicensed version.The costs for this application, for the kind of job it does, are pretty decent.We're using their free Community Edition version.Some of the plugins that were previously free are not free now.The price point on SonarQube is good.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Security solutions are best for your needs.
383,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Miriam Tover
author avatarHungVu
Real User

Both of them are static analytic source tools but SonarQube focus on the quality of code, coding convention, and potential software logic bugs while Coverity focuses on security, it detects the code which may have a security risk and vulnerary for the attack. SonarQube is open-source and Coverity requires a license for production.

Top Comparisons
Compared 49% of the time.
Compared 13% of the time.
Compared 51% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 29% of the time.
Compared 20% of the time.
Also Known As
Synopsys Static AnalysisSonar
Learn
Veracode
Synopsys
SonarQube
Video Not Available
Overview

Veracode is an application security company that offers an automated cloud-based service for securing web, mobile and third-party enterprise applications. Veracode provides multiple security analysis technologies on a single platform, including static analysis, dynamic analysis, mobile application behavioral analysis and software composition analysis.

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.SonarQube is the central place to manage code quality, offering visual reporting on and across projects and enabling to replay the past to follow metrics evolution
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 SonarQube
Sample Customers
State of Missouri, Rekner
Information Not Available
Bank of America, Siemens, Cognizant, Thales, Cisco, eBay
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm33%
Insurance Company17%
Consumer Goods8%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company39%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm8%
Media Company6%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company35%
Manufacturing Company14%
Comms Service Provider10%
Retailer9%
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm36%
Wireless Company7%
Energy/Utilities Company7%
Software R&D Company7%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company35%
Comms Service Provider12%
Financial Services Firm8%
Retailer6%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business22%
Midsize Enterprise26%
Large Enterprise52%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business15%
Midsize Enterprise7%
Large Enterprise78%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Small Business23%
Midsize Enterprise23%
Large Enterprise54%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business18%
Midsize Enterprise1%
Large Enterprise81%
Find out what your peers are saying about Coverity vs. SonarQube and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
383,725 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email