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."Fortify on Demand's best feature is that there's no need to install and configure it locally since it's on the cloud."
"Speed and efficiency are great features."
"It has saved us a lot of time as we focus primarily on programming rather than tool operational work."
"The vulnerability detection and scanning are awesome features."
"The features that I have found most valuable include its security scan, the vulnerability finds, and the web interface to search and review the issues."
"The SAST feature is the most valuable."
"Audit workbench: for on-the-fly defect auditing."
"Fortify on Demand can be scaled very easily."
"There's a feature in Klocwork called 'on-the-fly analysis', which helps developers to find and fix the defects at the time of development itself."
"We like using the static analysis and code refactoring, which are very valuable because of our requirements to meet safety critical levels and reliability."
"On-the-fly analysis and incremental analysis are the best parts of Klocwork. Currently, we are using both of these features very effectively."
"The ability to create custom checkers is a plus."
"The most valuable feature of Klocwork is finding defects while you're doing the coding. For example, if you have an IDE plug-in of Klocwork on Visual Studio or Eclipse, you can find the faults; similar to using spell check on Word, you can find out defects during the development phase, which means that you don't have to wait till the development is over to find the flaws and address the deficiencies. I also find language support in Klocwork good because it used to support only C, C++, C#, and Java, but now, it also supports Java scripts and Python."
"The reporting helps us understand the trend of our results and whether we improve over time. We can see the history within Klocwork's server architecture and know that we're making things better. It creates a great story for our management. We can demonstrate value and how our software is developing over time."
"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."
"Temenos's (T-24) info basic is a separate programming interface, and such proprietary platforms and programming interfaces were not easily supported by the out-of-the-box versions of Fortify."
"It's still a little bit too complex for regular developers. It takes a little bit more time than usual. I know static code scan is not the main focus of the tool, but the overall time span to scan the code, and even to set up the code scanning, is a bit overwhelming for regular developers."
"There is room for improvement in the integration process."
"With Rapid7 I utilized its reporting capabilities to deliver Client Reports within just a few minutes of checking the data. I believe that HP’s FoD Clients could sell more services to clients if HP put more effort into delivering visually pleasing reporting capabilities."
"There were some regulated compliances, which were not there."
"Micro Focus Fortify on Demand could improve the user interface by making it more user-friendly."
"Reporting could be improved."
"The biggest deficiency is the integration with bug tracker systems. It might be better if the configuration screen presented for accessing the bug tracking systems could provide some flexibility."
"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."
"Klocwork does have a problem with true positives. It only found 30% of true positives in the Juliet test case."
"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."
"I hope that in each new release they add new features relating to the addition of checkers, improving their analysis engines etc."
"This solution could be improved if they offered support of more languages including Ada and Golang. They currently only support seven languages."
"I would like to see better codes between projects and a more user-friendly desktop in the next release."
"Klocwork has to improve its features to stay ahead of other free solutions."
"Every update that we receive requires of us a lengthy and involved process."
Fortify on Demand is ranked 11th in Application Security Tools with 56 reviews while Klocwork is ranked 18th 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, Checkmarx One, Veracode, Coverity and Fortify WebInspect, whereas Klocwork is most compared with SonarQube, Coverity, Polyspace Code Prover, CodeSonar and GitLab. See our Fortify on Demand vs. Klocwork report.
See our list of best Application Security Tools vendors and best Application Security Testing (AST) 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.
